Just had a client push back on a 'work for hire' clause in a design contract

I used a pretty standard template I found online for a logo project, but the client's lawyer flagged the 'work for hire' language. They said it didn't clearly state that all rights transfer upon final payment, which could leave me on the hook. I rewrote it to say 'all copyrights are assigned to the Client upon receipt of the final installment' based on a clause from a professional group. The difference was night and day in terms of clarity. Has anyone else had to tighten up their rights transfer wording recently?

4 comments

4 Comments

craig.parker6d ago

Yeah those old templates really don't spell things out clear enough.

zarat3710d ago

Yeah, that "night and day" clarity thing is so real. A friend of mine, a photographer, had a contract that just said "work for hire" for a big shoot. The client's company got bought out later and the new owners claimed they didn't own the images. It turned into a huge mess, way worse than @keith164's phone bill story. She had to get a lawyer to sort it out and it cost her a lot of stress. Now her contract spells out the exact moment rights transfer, just like you did. It seems so obvious after the fact, but those old templates are full of traps.

garcia.cameron10d ago

Tbh, that sounds like a lawyer making things too complicated.

keith16410d ago

Reminds me of the time my uncle tried to explain his phone bill... ended up needing a spreadsheet.