DAE keep seeing 'work for hire' clauses in contracts that don't actually meet the legal definition?

I mean, I've reviewed three this month from different clients, and they all just slap the phrase in without the specific language the Copyright Office requires. Has anyone else had to explain this to a client who thought they were covered?

3 comments

3 Comments

ray_burns24d ago

Absolutely, it's a constant issue. Just had a client send over a standard services agreement that used the term but missed all the required parts about it being a specially ordered work. They were shocked when I pointed it out. You really have to spell it out for people, because they think the phrase alone is some kind of magic legal shield.

joseph_bailey24d ago

Three clients this month thought "work made for hire" was automatic.

gray_hall424d ago

Ray's got it right... the phrase alone doesn't do anything. I had a client who put "work for hire" in a freelance graphic design contract for a logo and some social media graphics, then tried to claim they owned everything outright without any transfer of copyright. Had to explain that unless it fits one of the nine specific categories in the Copyright Act and they signed a separate written agreement saying it was specially ordered, it just doesn't count. They kept saying "but the contract says work for hire" like that was supposed to override the law... it was a long conversation.