I always try to keep track of the stories I write, and to update my posts when new information comes to light. Sometimes, though, it's worth re-visiting the stories themselves--as in the two cases below, where "bewares" that appeared to have resolved return, unhappily, for a second go-around (or seem to).
In 2019, I wrote a post about a rights grab in the guidelines for the annual short story contest conducted by Harper's Bazaar magazine, the wording of which included a surrender of copyright. Here's what I wrote at the time (Hearst is Harper's parent company):
The bolded language isn't completely clear, at least as I see it. Read narrowly (by entering and in consideration for publication, i.e., as a consideration for publication only), it requires the winner or winners only to surrender their copyrights and all the rights that copyright includes for zero financial compensation. It could also, however, be read more broadly, to indicate that merely entering the contest constitutes a surrender of copyright ownership.






