Writer Beware

Latest Posts

Authors and Authors’ Estates Sue The Topps Company for Unpaid Royalties

FEB 20, 2026February 20, 20261 COMMENT

This is yet another Writer Beware post about allegations of royalties long left unpaid. But it's also about the challenges of work-for-hire arrangements, and what can potentially go wrong when intellectual property repeatedly changes hands.

The BattleTech and Shadowrun franchises--which included both games and novels--were originally developed and published in the 1980s and 1990s by FASA Corporation, a publisher of role-playing and board games. FASA closed down in 2001, and the two franchises were transferred to a new company called WizKids, founded by former FASA employees.

In 2003, the Topps Company, which manufactures trading cards and other collectibles (and candy, including the iconic Bazooka bubble gum), acquired WizKids and its IP, in a bid to expand its entertainment holdings. Topps closed WizKids down in 2008, citing economic factors; it subsequently sold WizKids and its IP to the National Entertainment Collectibles Association, but retained rights to BattleTech and Shadowrun.

CONTESTS AND AWARDS

Unhappy Returns: Harper’s Bazaar Short Story Contest, America Star Books

Header image: round wooden block with a red angry face graphic, standing on end on a blond wood table against a pale blue background (Credit: VRVIRUS / Shutterstock.com)

FEB 6, 2026February 6, 202618 COMMENTS

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.

EDITING SCAMS

Two New Impersonation Scams to Watch For

Header Image: funny fake face disguise: black glasses, nose, and mouth on bright yellow background (Credit: nito / Shutterstock.com)

JAN 30, 2026January 30, 202628 COMMENTS

Impersonation scams in publishing tend to be variations on a theme, since the goal is always the same: to sell you something. In that sense, the scams below, which are aimed at tricking writers into paying for editing, don't break new ground. Still, the approaches are distinctive, and I've seen enough examples at this point to be sure they are A Thing (as opposed to isolated occurrences), so I'm highlighting them here.

As you'll see, they appear to be yet another variant of the AI-driven scams from Nigeria. One of the characteristics of such scams--along with Gmail addresses and effusive fake personalization--is how closely each variant sticks to a specific M.O, customizing the approach to the targeted writer but otherwise pulling from the same playbook.

For tips on vetting an independent editor, see the Editors and Editing Services page of the Writer Beware website.

BEST OF WRITER BEWARE: YEAR IN REVIEW

Best of Writer Beware: 2025 in Review

Header iimage: the number 2025 as bookshelves filled with books, on a white background, with a faint reflection below (credit: Maxx-Studio / Shutterstoci.com)

JAN 16, 2026January 16, 202633 COMMENTS

It's been a busy year in writing scams (but then what year isn't?). From the new AI marketing scams, to nasty contract clauses, to publishers behaving badly, to the biggest copyright infringement restitution in history, Writer Beware has been on the beat. If you missed any of our posts, here's your chance to catch up.

On a personal note, it's always instructive for me to do these overviews, not just because they help me take stock of how well Writer Beware is fulfilling its mission, but also because looking at the trends and changes of the year just past can give me a sense of what I'll likely be focusing on in the year ahead. I was a little surprised, for example, to see how much space I devoted to generative AI.

Also somewhat surprising: scams are what most people think of when they think of Writer Beware, but my posts about scams actually comprised less than half of what I published in 2025. Just a reminder that "beware" applies to much more than literary fraud.

CONTRACTS

Reversion Redux

Header image: a double circle containing stylized images of contract pages in the outer area and the words Notice of Termination in the center, on a dark-blue background

JAN 9, 2026January 9, 20263 COMMENTS

In the aftermath of the recent Anthropic Settlement (more information here), many writers are making a reassessment of the necessity and value of copyright registration. Claiming a share of pay-out from the settlement is 100% dependent on having a work registered with the U. S. Copyright Office in a timely fashion. It’s relatively easy to register a work with the Copyright Office and doing so can guarantee the right to receive statutory damages in infringement lawsuits and settlements.

These writers may be overlooking another significant factor in making a class action claim – whether the work’s rights have been reverted to the author.

Under the definitions on the Anthropic Settlement website, there are two types of rightsholders who may make a claim – those who have received publishing rights by contract (generally, the publishers) and those who have licensed those rights (generally, the authors). While this breakdown is very common for traditionally published books, there are many exceptions. Self-publishers, for example, own their rights 100% because they’re both the publisher and author. (For these works, Amazon is a distributor and owns no publishing rights.) Another important exception is for works that originally had a publisher but have gone out of print and have had their rights returned to the authors (rights reversion).

CONTRACTS

Why These Contract Clauses Are Scary

Header image: the word Contract etched in concrete, with a crack between "Con" and "Tract" dividing the word (Credit: Lane V. Erickson / Shutterstock.com)

DEC 19, 2025December 19, 202519 COMMENTS

The clauses I'm going to discuss in this post come from the contract of Shadow Light Press, a publisher of fantasy and science fiction with deep ties to the LitRPG community. The contract stirred controversy this week when it was publicly posted on Reddit--largely from people aghast at its author-unfriendliness, but also because of alleged issues around the publisher's relationship with a major progression fantasy and LitRPG Discord server.

I'm not going to go into those issues here (you can find out more, if you like, from the comments on the Reddit post). My focus will be on the contract itself (which I can confirm is authentic: I've seen several other copies). My intent--as always with my posts about publishing contracts--isn't just to call out a publisher for problematic language, but to explain why it's problematic, with the goal of empowering my readers to better evaluate the contracts they may be offered. New writers, who may be less knowledgeable or dazzled by the prospect of publication, are especially vulnerable to predatory contracts like this one.

Oh, and I'm not a lawyer. So what follows isn't legal commentary or advice.