2 ms·
And the article is arguing that the "work-for-hire" clause isn't sufficient to cause the contractor to loose the copyright.
by platz 12y ago
And the article is arguing that the "work-for-hire" clause isn't sufficient to cause the contractor to loose the copyright.
- Dystopian 12y agoAnd in turn the company should look to copyright assignment. As a contractor, you shouldn't be signing umbrella work-for-hire clauses either. They're usually part of the shotgun approach of "we own everything you do, always, ever". Copyright assignment is where the give-and-take should take place (which I'm surprised the author didn't speak about) - "company gets copyright assignment based on XYZ (which could include payment, equity agreement, etc.)" IANAL - I just hire one with one who protects me from signing stupid stuff and is occasionally the nasty stick when clients act up.