question on design for a client and charges

I designed a site for a fitness model over a year ago and we verbally agreed
that I was going to do all her updates. Now she is working for a company that
will hire a designer and wants me to give her the psd/fla files so the new
designer can update/change the site which means I will no longer be able to
include it in my portfolio. Can I refuse this or even charge her a fee if she
wants the psd/fla files since I designed the site ?

Have you been paid for the orginal site design?

If yes then in my opinion she is entitled to what you have produced
assuming that all monies originally agreed have been paid in full.

As for including it in your portfolio you can just upload it to your
server. www.whatever.com/fitness_model

You could charge a nominal fee for copyying all the files to a disc or
emailing them.

That in my opinion is how business works. Some people may well have
different view but its pretty clear-cut to me.

No-one wants to lose business but Im afraid its just the way the cookie
crumbles.




Bolo911 wrote:

I designed a site for a fitness model over a year ago and we verbally agreed
that I was going to do all her updates. Now she is working for a company that
will hire a designer and wants me to give her the psd/fla files so the new
designer can update/change the site which means I will no longer be able to
include it in my portfolio. Can I refuse this or even charge her a fee if she
wants the psd/fla files since I designed the site ?

If you design something unique (like a website) you own the copyright of
the webste unless there is written agreement that you sold the
copyright. (that is the Eropean law on this)

If she wants an other designer there are two choices: she buys the
copyright or she builds a new site.

By paying for the site she only paid the right of use of the design for
the website for the period agreed.

Normally copyright is very expensive to by. (thousends of dollars)
Better is trying to get some compensation that makes you feel
comfortable; but you should be compensated.

Things like this will nearly allways get you in conflict with your
client. These are your rihgts, but how much money you can get from this
depends on your tactics and persuasion.

good luck, Joost Kolkman

Osgood wrote:

Have you been paid for the orginal site design?

If yes then in my opinion she is entitled to what you have produced
assuming that all monies originally agreed have been paid in full.

As for including it in your portfolio you can just upload it to your
server. www.whatever.com/fitness_model

You could charge a nominal fee for copyying all the files to a disc or
emailing them.

That in my opinion is how business works. Some people may well have
different view but its pretty clear-cut to me.

No-one wants to lose business but Im afraid its just the way the cookie
crumbles.




Bolo911 wrote:

I designed a site for a fitness model over a year ago and we verbally
agreed that I was going to do all her updates. Now she is working for
a company that will hire a designer and wants me to give her the
psd/fla files so the new designer can update/change the site which
means I will no longer be able to include it in my portfolio. Can I
refuse this or even charge her a fee if she wants the psd/fla files
since I designed the site ?

Artists copyright laws are in my opinion a complete shambles and really
should be abolished as they serve no purpose but to cause conflict. Un
fortunately the law is an ass, most of us know that.

The way I see it is a cleint pays for a service and they own what is
produced.

I said to someone in another thread you would'nt buy a car and then
expect the car manufacture to tell you where, when and how you can drive
it. Similar you pay a plumber to instal a bespoke toliet system, its
yours you don't expect the plumber to say you can only use that 100
times during the year unless of course you want to pay extra to use it.

I accept that artists copyright laws do exist but in my opinion they
are quite ridiculous ans all artist who abide by them are quite frankly
in my opinion no better than trash.





Joost Kolkman wrote:

If you design something unique (like a website) you own the copyright of
the webste unless there is written agreement that you sold the
copyright. (that is the Eropean law on this)

If she wants an other designer there are two choices: she buys the
copyright or she builds a new site.

By paying for the site she only paid the right of use of the design for
the website for the period agreed.

Normally copyright is very expensive to by. (thousends of dollars)
Better is trying to get some compensation that makes you feel
comfortable; but you should be compensated.

Things like this will nearly allways get you in conflict with your
client. These are your rihgts, but how much money you can get from this
depends on your tactics and persuasion.

good luck, Joost Kolkman

Osgood wrote:

Have you been paid for the orginal site design?

If yes then in my opinion she is entitled to what you have produced
assuming that all monies originally agreed have been paid in full.

As for including it in your portfolio you can just upload it to your
server. www.whatever.com/fitness_model

You could charge a nominal fee for copyying all the files to a disc or
emailing them.

That in my opinion is how business works. Some people may well have
different view but its pretty clear-cut to me.

No-one wants to lose business but Im afraid its just the way the
cookie crumbles.




Bolo911 wrote:

I designed a site for a fitness model over a year ago and we verbally
agreed that I was going to do all her updates. Now she is working for
a company that will hire a designer and wants me to give her the
psd/fla files so the new designer can update/change the site which
means I will no longer be able to include it in my portfolio. Can I
refuse this or even charge her a fee if she wants the psd/fla files
since I designed the site ?

So you think you bought dreamweaver... I am afraid not, you bought a
right of use, if you like it or not and you are not alowed to modify it....

Joost Kolkman



Osgood wrote:

Artists copyright laws are in my opinion a complete shambles and really
should be abolished as they serve no purpose but to cause conflict. Un
fortunately the law is an ass, most of us know that.

The way I see it is a cleint pays for a service and they own what is
produced.

I said to someone in another thread you would'nt buy a car and then
expect the car manufacture to tell you where, when and how you can drive
it. Similar you pay a plumber to instal a bespoke toliet system, its
yours you don't expect the plumber to say you can only use that 100
times during the year unless of course you want to pay extra to use it.

I accept that artists copyright laws do exist but in my opinion they
are quite ridiculous ans all artist who abide by them are quite frankly
in my opinion no better than trash.





Joost Kolkman wrote:

If you design something unique (like a website) you own the copyright
of the webste unless there is written agreement that you sold the
copyright. (that is the Eropean law on this)

If she wants an other designer there are two choices: she buys the
copyright or she builds a new site.

By paying for the site she only paid the right of use of the design
for the website for the period agreed.

Normally copyright is very expensive to by. (thousends of dollars)
Better is trying to get some compensation that makes you feel
comfortable; but you should be compensated.

Things like this will nearly allways get you in conflict with your
client. These are your rihgts, but how much money you can get from
this depends on your tactics and persuasion.

good luck, Joost Kolkman

Osgood wrote:

Have you been paid for the orginal site design?

If yes then in my opinion she is entitled to what you have produced
assuming that all monies originally agreed have been paid in full.

As for including it in your portfolio you can just upload it to your
server. www.whatever.com/fitness_model

You could charge a nominal fee for copyying all the files to a disc
or emailing them.

That in my opinion is how business works. Some people may well have
different view but its pretty clear-cut to me.

No-one wants to lose business but Im afraid its just the way the
cookie crumbles.




Bolo911 wrote:

I designed a site for a fitness model over a year ago and we
verbally agreed that I was going to do all her updates. Now she is
working for a company that will hire a designer and wants me to give
her the psd/fla files so the new designer can update/change the site
which means I will no longer be able to include it in my portfolio.
Can I refuse this or even charge her a fee if she wants the psd/fla
files since I designed the site ?

Joost Kolkman wrote:

So you think you bought dreamweaver... I am afraid not, you bought a
right of use, if you like it or not and you are not alowed to modify it....

Depends what you mean by modify. I have to a certain extent, like
introducing extentions, throwing away internal files I dont want. In
effect its mine. I can throw it in the bin, stamp on it and do what i
want with it, even sell it on like I would a car.

I understand it needs a licence to use because without would open up
avenues for piracy, which is not acceptable. Dreamweaver over an above
that does not tell me I can or cant use it for designing certain websites.

The difference is we are talking aboout besopke artwork not something
which is generic and needs to be controlled by licencing agreements.

I thought stealing of copyright work is piracy, but I might be mistaken...

Joost Kolkman

Osgood wrote:

Joost Kolkman wrote:

So you think you bought dreamweaver... I am afraid not, you bought a
right of use, if you like it or not and you are not alowed to modify
it....



Depends what you mean by modify. I have to a certain extent, like
introducing extentions, throwing away internal files I dont want. In
effect its mine. I can throw it in the bin, stamp on it and do what i
want with it, even sell it on like I would a car.

I understand it needs a licence to use because without would open up
avenues for piracy, which is not acceptable. Dreamweaver over an above
that does not tell me I can or cant use it for designing certain websites.

The difference is we are talking aboout besopke artwork not something
which is generic and needs to be controlled by licencing agreements.

Depends what you mean by modify. I have to a certain extent, like
introducing extentions, throwing away internal files I dont want. In
effect its mine. I can throw it in the bin, stamp on it and do what i
want with it, even sell it on like I would a car.

I think you do and want more than you are alowed to do....

Joost Kolkman

Joost Kolkman wrote:

I thought stealing of copyright work is piracy, but I might be mistaken...

If you think it is copyrighted then technically it is stealing. This is
were we differ in agreement although I accept that by law, according to
what I read in the Artist and Writers Year book, many many years ago,
you are correct. I don't know even if that publication still exists
today, I hope not. Im trying to point out why in my opinion the law is
an ass.

See I dont get this artist copyright law at all and quite frankly I dont
want to.

I go to Christies, buy a £4000 painting and I sell it the next day for
£6000. Now according to you I shouldnt be allowed to do that and I don't
see why you should think this way? I have paid the artist in full for it
as agreed, simple no copyright, everybody is clearly happy. Now why does
this simple effective way of working not apply in the 'commercial' arena
such as graphic design and website design. Why is there this mysterious
almost invisible need for a copyright at all.

Isnt it very peculiar, even sad how artist/client get on extemely well
in their relationship when its to the advantage of the artist and the
moment the client says 'we don't want to use your services anymore', for
whatever reason, some artists suddenly turn around and fire the
copyright law at their once very valuable client.

To me its just an incredibly childish way of doing business. I guess
that's what Im trying to say. Its like a personal vendetta for having
the audacity to move the work to a different source. Personally I would
give over everything I have produced for the client assuming they have
paid me for it and just move on.

To me it just come across as a desperate attempt to 'squeeze' the client
for all you can get. You should be acting in their best interest not
creating conflict just because they decide to give someone else the
work. We all don't like ahving work taken away from us but is their any
need to act like a spolit brat.

The client, given that you are as helpful as posssible, just may come
back. Will they if you 'hold a gun to their head', I doubt it.

I do what I think is in the best interest for the client and my business
I don't get into silly copyright agruments.

Joost Kolkman wrote:

Depends what you mean by modify. I have to a certain extent, like
introducing extentions, throwing away internal files I dont want. In
effect its mine. I can throw it in the bin, stamp on it and do what i
want with it, even sell it on like I would a car.


I think you do and want more than you are alowed to do....

lol humm I dont understand. Anyway Ive covered most things in my
previous post.