If a publisher is indeed "investing" -- that is, helping you to develop as an author, or making your name in the first place -- a contractual tie may be appropriate, as I said in my original posting. But let me ask you this: suppose that your book doesn't sell as well as you expect (I see it is just out in November), or that your editor leaves, or that you have a great idea that's appropriate for some other publisher's list--will you still feel that way? After all, if your publisher succeeds for you, why do they need a contractual tie? Isn't the contract designed to protect them precisely in the case where you are unhappy? Isn't mutual success sufficient?
I'm a publisher -- I am in exactly the same position as Artech House. I might develop an author, only to have him or her solicited by other publishers. It happens, and I hate it. But I think that tying an author down -- especially a new author who doesn't yet realize the big differences between publishers -- is often taking unfair advantage.
As John Levine says, it's probably easy enough to get out of a RoFR, unless it says for all future projects. So maybe this is a tempest in a teapot.
Anyway, best of luck with your book. Like you, I have a lot of respect for your publisher. I've heard good things about their books.
