Greetings! I am a S1mpl3m4n with a simple plan. Issues have been partly raised in the forums and some chapter posts on webnovel but the staunch defenders of the "contract" are claiming it as false while not providing the exact wording in the contract that directly contradicts it.
Now, this could be for various reasons (Contract itself preventing them from speaking out, unclear as well that it was mentioned in their version of the contract, or the clause wasn't in theirs but is in others). So to clear the air and foster discussion on this topic, this simple man has thought the best course of action to force a proper discussion from the community is to post a version of the contract that legitimately existed and was offered.
Some will claim it has been edited, which I won't deny. The edit was to remove typos, add commentary after a clause and, of course, fix formatting. Other than that, I don't know what edits they are pertaining to.
Why am I doing this? Is it to present webnovel in a bad light? Not at all/entirely. This is actually to remind all person(s) signing contracts to get proper legal counsel before executing/signing a contract. As most of you may know, there are quite a few writers who, in their lives, will only see a contract for the first time when this is presented to them and might be caught in the moment when they sign, without actually doing their due diligence. I just hope to help them make an informed decision so they can consult an attorney for clarification as well as steps to make sure ambiguity in the wording of the contract and the clarifications mentioned herein or said in the course of "negotiation" (If they would have this opportunity) is put into writing. And, hopefully, those clarifications are made part of the signed and notarized contract as addendums or the contract itself is revised to remove the ambiguity.
This is not a case to say a person is dumb for signing. Each person has their own circumstance and what is presented could be life changing when you receive it. But life is a series of peaks and valleys, and it is not always so pretty. It is my wish to lay it out there to avoid a situation where an author finds out later there were issues with the contract they signed, which were never clarified, comes to light and they are now contractually bound to it.
If the commentary is wrong, then, isn't it a good thing? As long as the contract is updated and most, if not all, of the ambiguity is cleared up and put into writing, there would be less issues to worry about. It benefits the contracting parties I would say.
I did not sign any NDA and am not in violation of anything but if this post would be taken down, then I guess I'll try again to bring issues to light.
Anyway, take time to review what I'll post and don't be swayed by emotion. I'd like to reiterate, this came from a legitimate version of the contract being offered. I will not say it is what is offered to everyone, I'd expect slight variations. But the core of the contract's wording would not drastically change, hence why we have now come to this.
This is also a version of a royalty based contract, not the fixed rate contract advertised.
Cheers!