This proposal has been brandished by writers since the controversial dismissal of Olivier Nora, boss of the Grasset publishing house. But the government has been open on the issue, calling for a “consensus” to be built on the subject.
The Senate opposed Wednesday the establishment of a “conscience clause” for writers, a proposal brandished since the controversial dismissal of the boss of the Grasset publishing house. But the government has been open on the issue, calling for a “consensus” to be built on the subject.
As part of the examination of a transpartisan bill aimed at improving relations between authors and publishers, the parliamentary debate was hit by current events in the publishing world.
Already valid for journalists
The sector is plunged into a deep crisis after the departure of Grasset’s boss, Olivier Nora, blamed according to several hundred artists on businessman Vincent Bolloré, who controls Hachette, number one in the sector and parent company of Grasset.
Since then, calls have increased for the establishment of a “conscience clause” allowing authors to terminate their contract in certain cases, which exists in particular among journalists.
Several amendments in this direction were examined by the upper house, offering the opportunity to the Minister of Culture Catherine Pégard to position herself.
She called on parliamentarians to “act with great caution, without giving in to the impatience of current events and with the desire to achieve the consensus desired by all”. But she showed a very clear sign of openness by giving a favorable opinion to an amendment from socialist senator Sylvie Robert.
The measure, presented as a “confidence clause”, makes it possible to consider the termination of a contract in the event of a change in the publisher’s “editorial policy” or in the event of the arrival of a new majority shareholder. Provided, however, that these changes “harm the moral interests” of the author or “seriously compromise his material interests”.
“The legislator has the duty to act to protect authors in extreme cases, without destabilizing the economics of the publishing contract,” insisted Sylvie Robert.
Ms. Pégard appreciated this “strictly regulated” wording, recalling that the termination of the contract would in this case remain entrusted to “the assessment of a judge”.
But the proposal was rejected by senators, the right and the centrists showing concern to relaunch consultation before legislating.
“This amendment modifies the essential balances of the publishing contract”, worried Max Brisson (Les Républicains), denouncing a “media response”.
Several elected officials, however, believed that the measure could be inserted subsequently, during its examination in the National Assembly.
Supported by senators Laure Darcos (Horizons) and Sylvie Robert, this bill, adopted without difficulty, contains other more consensual measures.
Among them, the generalization of a guaranteed minimum of copyright, the increase in the frequency of “surrenders”, that is to say the balance of sales paving the way to remuneration, or even better progressiveness of the remuneration of authors.
