[fobside]

I was reading up on copyrights and I was hoping some of you that design may be able to help me. I know that upon creation there is ownership of any work. Now, I was also reading that any work done while under an employment, is said to belong to the employer.

When a design is sold to a client, are there hard and fast rules about the use of the design? Does the client own the final product, the source files, or what? Is this something that should be specified each time work is done?

[art_director]

Originally posted by fobside:
I was reading up on copyrights and I was hoping some of you that design may be able to help me. I know that upon creation there is ownership of any work. Now, I was also reading that any work done while under an employment, is said to belong to the employer.

When a design is sold to a client, are there hard and fast rules about the use of the design? Does the client own the final product, the source files, or what? Is this something that should be specified each time work is done?

if you've been contracted to create a site for a client they have paid you for your talents / expertise and therefore own the work. if they don't pay you it's an entirely different matter.

while they may own the finished piece you may certainly use it for self-promotion (ie. portfolio).

[fobside]

May I ask where you are getting your information from? Also, what if I happen to give my client a template based site, which is easily editable for his use? Would the client be allowed to use it on another domain?

I'm thinking that this could all be specified in a contract about what the client is paying for, rather than a common assumption that the client is paying for end work or all source files.

[art_director]

Originally posted by fobside:
May I ask where you are getting your information from? Also, what if I happen to give my client a template based site, which is easily editable for his use? Would the client be allowed to use it on another domain?

I'm thinking that this could all be specified in a contract about what the client is paying for, rather than a common assumption that the client is paying for end work or all source files.

where does my info come from:
common industry knowledge. been doing this a long while.

use on another domain:
depends, are you saying it's the same site and he / she is just transfering it? not sure why you ask, are you the host and this was part of a package?

[godzookie2k]

The client owns the work you do once you receive that paycheck. Your employer owns the work you do, when you receive that paycheck. You may or may not be able to present the work in your portfolio, depending on if its stipulated in the contract.


If you really wanna cover your ass you can mention it in your contract, but it really is just common practice.

[godzookie2k]

if the client wants to use your templates that they own on another one of their sites, thats their perogotive. If you stipulated in your contract originally usage rights, then you'd have a leg to stand on, but you don't really have a say into usage rights on something you don't own.

[art_director]

you can always use it in your portfolio.

[ultra-V]

if you've been contracted to create a site for a client they have paid you for your talents / expertise and therefore own the work.

I think this is a little misleading. I deal mostly for print, so I'm a little unclear on how it applies to web. But unless your contract says otherwise, my understanding is that the actual copyright is owned by the creator. The creator is you as an independent designer (if you are the sole proprieter), or the firm you work for. AIGA has a booklet (PDF) on the matter. (See, the AIGA can be useful!)

That said, I think it's standard practice to transfer ownership to the client. And/or let them use the designs however they see fit for their biz. If they are using it for a domain for a different business, it may be a different matter.

As for the issue of transferring source files, I don't unless they specifically ask - at the advice of my accountant. For sales tax reasons: design work can be classified as consultancy, not subjet to sales tax. But if you regularly supply all files, it can be considered that you are delivering a product, and thus would have to charge sales tax. If a client requests source files, I'd charge a separate fee for the disks, which may be subject to taxing, being a tangible deliverable. Again, I'm more a print designer and most clients only care about the final printed piece, not the source files.

[fobside]

Originally posted by ultra-V:

As for the issue of transferring source files, I don't unless they specifically ask - at the advice of my accountant. For sales tax reasons: design work can be classified as consultancy, not subjet to sales tax. But if you regularly supply all files, it can be considered that you are delivering a product, and thus would have to charge sales tax. If a client requests source files, I'd charge a separate fee for the disks, which may be subject to taxing, being a tangible deliverable. Again, I'm more a print designer and most clients only care about the final printed piece, not the source files.

Consulting is not taxable? Really?

[ultra-V]

Consulting is not taxable? Really?

I should state I work in New York. I can't speak for other states. And here, you do not need to charge sales tax on consulting time. Here's another AIGA PDF, on sales tax.

[art_director]

Originally posted by ultra-V:
I think this is a little misleading. I deal mostly for print, so I'm a little unclear on how it applies to web. But unless your contract says otherwise, my understanding is that the actual copyright is owned by the creator. The creator is you as an independent designer (if you are the sole proprieter), or the firm you work for. AIGA has a booklet (PDF) on the matter. (See, the AIGA can be useful!)

hmmmmmm...try telling a judge, "well, the aiga says..."

once they pay you they own the work because it was created for them. you can use it for self-promotion purposes (ie. portfolio, shows, new business prospecting, etc.)

[ultra-V]

No, but it usually works to say "Federal law states...." AIGA is just reporting the laws.

And it all depends on your contract. Work-for-hire is a different ball of wax.

[himself]

Originally posted by ultra-V:
No, but it usually works to say "Federal law states...." AIGA is just reporting the laws.

And it all depends on your contract. Work-for-hire is a different ball of wax.

All this depends onwhat was stated in the initial agreement/contract between you and your client. Like ultra-V said earlier, whenever you, as a designer, create anything, you, as the designer, have complete ownership of what you create. Depending on your agreement, once the client pays you you may end up handing over total ownership to the client, or you may only grant them certain rights depending on how the client intends to use your work. If, for example, the client only intends to present your design on their website, you don't have to grant them any rights other than those pertaining to usage on the internet. It's always good to hammer out this issue before you draft a contract/agreement so they'll be no surprises down the line. Also inform them that the whole idea behind the granting of rights instead of outright ownership has a lot to do with protecting both the designer and the client from misuse and copyright infringement. If you find out someone has been copying your work a few years down the line, you should at least have the right(s) to contest that infringement.

As for source files, the only thing the client has any entitlement to is the finished design, unless the client furnished you with some of those materials (images/photographs, copy, etc). In every other case, all source materials belong to you, the designer.

Most of the information on this topic can be found at the AIGA website, and more information can be found at the Graphic Artists Guild website as well.