Copyright on graphic design
Discussion
Would anyone happen to know the absolute law regarding ownership of graphic design and artwork?
Context: My sister company (graphic designers) have had a request to hand over quite a lot of artwork to a client and they'd rather not do this. The reason is that the artwork relates to a large number of documents that require regular updates. The original deal was struck at a very low rate on the basis that longer term the job would be very profitable by virtue of the need to make regular updates. This deal was struck with a long term client with whom they had a very very good mutual relationship. The short story is that the client was acquired - new management team in place who have an 'everything's done in house' mentality.
The default is normally to consider that once a client has paid for their work, they own it. Artwork and all.
However, driven by this current situation, research reveals a bit of a grey area. It appears that a client only buys the end product - in this case a print-ready PDF file unless specifically agreed otherwise. The graphic design applied and the artwork used to articulate that design into the final print-ready PDF are effectively tools, that remain owned by the originator.
But there also appears some conflicting interpretations of this so would be good to get an angle from anyone that may know this better.
Context: My sister company (graphic designers) have had a request to hand over quite a lot of artwork to a client and they'd rather not do this. The reason is that the artwork relates to a large number of documents that require regular updates. The original deal was struck at a very low rate on the basis that longer term the job would be very profitable by virtue of the need to make regular updates. This deal was struck with a long term client with whom they had a very very good mutual relationship. The short story is that the client was acquired - new management team in place who have an 'everything's done in house' mentality.
The default is normally to consider that once a client has paid for their work, they own it. Artwork and all.
However, driven by this current situation, research reveals a bit of a grey area. It appears that a client only buys the end product - in this case a print-ready PDF file unless specifically agreed otherwise. The graphic design applied and the artwork used to articulate that design into the final print-ready PDF are effectively tools, that remain owned by the originator.
But there also appears some conflicting interpretations of this so would be good to get an angle from anyone that may know this better.
I think it depends entirely on the contract and T's and C's. If there's no mention of transfer of copyright in the contract then I believe it stays with the designer. I remember a previous employer discovering that the graphics design company they wanted to ditch actually held the copyright to the company's logo! Not happy bunnies...
Digging your heels in over this will only encourage/reinforce the customer's "everything in house" attitude. Unless there's a truckload of money involved and you want to lawyer up, then negotiating a suitable fee to prepare/package and transfer ownership of relevant files to them may be the best approach.
Any stock images/templates etc that you've used may not be transferrable anyway
Digging your heels in over this will only encourage/reinforce the customer's "everything in house" attitude. Unless there's a truckload of money involved and you want to lawyer up, then negotiating a suitable fee to prepare/package and transfer ownership of relevant files to them may be the best approach.
Any stock images/templates etc that you've used may not be transferrable anyway
Copyright vests in the author of the work.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/conte...
Certainly with photography, which was my business, copyright was always mine and usage was by licence. Paying money does not transfer copyright unless agreed.
The tendency in a situation like this can be to play nice and roll over in the hope of getting future work. You won't, so stand fast (check the paperwork first just to be sure). You may wish to submit an estimate for purchase of copyright - and quote a chunk of law at them so they don't get the idea of using the work. But you are in charge, not them.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/conte...
Certainly with photography, which was my business, copyright was always mine and usage was by licence. Paying money does not transfer copyright unless agreed.
The tendency in a situation like this can be to play nice and roll over in the hope of getting future work. You won't, so stand fast (check the paperwork first just to be sure). You may wish to submit an estimate for purchase of copyright - and quote a chunk of law at them so they don't get the idea of using the work. But you are in charge, not them.
Simpo Two said:
StevieBee said:
Thanks chaps - very useful!
Hey I just clocked who the OP was! You should know all this like the back of your hand Steve!Thing is that the issue rarely arrises and when it does, we're pretty sanguine about it...life moves on and all that, so never really had need to look at it.
In this case, the sums involved are not insignificant - over £50k a year which is effectively someone's salary.
I regularly encounter the same sorts of issues at my work which is a design consultancy. The client will occasionally want the files for something, whether it be CAD files, software, gerbers etc. The golden rule is you don't give them the golden goose; never send them the source files, only send them things they can look at and use but not edit essentially.
I would double check the T&Cs but I would be holding onto all the good stuff, they've paid you for the end result - you don't need to show your working.
I would double check the T&Cs but I would be holding onto all the good stuff, they've paid you for the end result - you don't need to show your working.
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff