Work for Hire

[DaveGink]

OK... For the third time now something has happened to me that I need to share with every artist here. It kind of angers and saddens me at the same time.

I just had an opportunity to work with a fairly large music merchandising company but because of their requirement for me to sign a "Work For Hire" contract I was forced to turn them down. What really bothers me is that I was told I was the first artist to decline signing their contract. This says to me that there are either a lot of artists that just don't know what 'Work For Hire' actually means, just don't care, or are willing to sign them anyway. Unfortunately this is hurting it for every single artist out there.

For those of you who don't know what 'Work For Hire' contracts are; they are contracts automatically stripping an artist of every right and authorship to any work they created for that client. Legally, it is as if the client created the art. They become the legal author of all the work done for them, and they automatically own the copyright. They can take the art and do whatever they want with it...put it on whatever they want...change it... sell it to whomever they want...and the artist will never see another dime. For instance, let's say you get paid $500.00 to do a tour shirt for a band though some big merch company (which would be a sad fee in and by itself). But since you signed a "work for hire" contract...now they are free to also sell the shirt in Spencer Gifts or in Target ...or put it on lunch boxes...or sell it to the band for their album cover...or make stickers of it...or whatever. They could make thousands and thousands of dollars for art they only paid $500.00 for. And legally, you couldn't even show it in your portfolio, much less sign the work without their permission, or use a portion in something else you create (you could even be sued for copyright infringement yourself if you did.)

This completely goes against the principal of copyright law that you, as the creator of the work, are entitled to be fairly compensated for how the art is used.

This is not the same as selling "all rights" to a work (although similar). Legally, with an "all rights" buyout, you are still the legal author of the work, even though you sold to the client the rights to use the art however and whenever they want. Just make sure that if you sell "all rights" you get paid enough to cover all the possible uses (And put a self-promotion clause into the agreement).

A written contract must specifically use the words "work for hire" or "work made for hire", to be a work for hire contract.

About the only time I feel a "work for hire" agreement is ethical, and in the best interest of both the artist and client. is when an artist is actually employed by an employer...and they are paying you a regular salary and you are receiving all the perks and benefits of employment...such as sick pay, holidays, social security, etc.

Even a logo job would be better served with an 'all-rights buy-out' rather than a 'Work For Hire' contract.

But unfortunately, there are a large number of cheap companies, especially in the music and publishing world, that are abusing "Work for Hire" contracts, and saying you must sign one to be able to work with them. That's simply unethical...and geared at taking advantage of the artist and giving ALL the rewards to the commissioning party. There is no reason with those types of company's that jobs couldn't be negotiated per usage, and agreed to on a case-by-case basis. Artists should get paid for the various usages that the art is being used for. And if you do sign a 'work for hire' agreement, it had better be in the best interest and fair to BOTH parties and be on a case-by-case project basis, AND the money had better be REALLY, REALLY GOOD! Because the damage to your career far outweighs the advantages, and as long as artists keep signing these abusive blanket 'work for hire' contracts, we are ALL being royally screwed!!!! Seriously!

[GIGART]

I hear ya...and agree. You must look out for yourself...

[Bryan Moats]

So very good for everyone to know. It is true, it's as though you sign over your freelance status and become a temporary employee of the company. Thanks Mr. Gink!

[Raymond Biesinger]

And that's the position of the Graphic Artists Guild, too. I just picked up the GAG handbook last week, and have hardly touched it yet (no time for now), but there's all sorts of discussion within about work for hire, ethical business practice (for art directors, illustrators, and designers of all kinds), copyright, pricing, and contracts there.

Quite handy as a second opinion (or even a first opinion) on pretty much anything a graphic artist will encounter. And it's pretty, too.

edit: and I bet you all know this already, though.

[DaveGink]

Originally Posted by GIGART

I hear ya...and agree. You must look out for yourself...

And look out for each other. Because every artist that signs one of these blanket 'work for hire contracts' is perpetuating the problem for all of us.

[DaveGink]

Originally Posted by bmoats

So very good for everyone to know. It is true, it's as though you sign over your freelance status and become a temporary employee of the company. Thanks Mr. Gink!

Exactly...without any of the benefits of actually being employed...and usually lousy money on top of it.

[DaveGink]

Originally Posted by Raymond Biesinger

And that's the position of the Graphic Artists Guild, too. I just picked up the GAG handbook last week, and have hardly touched it yet (no time for now), but there's all sorts of discussion within about work for hire, ethical business practice (for art directors, illustrators, and designers of all kinds), copyright, pricing, and contracts there.

Quite handy as a second opinion (or even a first opinion) on pretty much anything a graphic artist will encounter. And it's pretty, too.

Speaking of the Guild, just today I found this posted in their news section:
It's interesting...

Guild Prez vs AOL Time Warner

April 22, 2003





Richard Parsons, CEO
AOL Time Warner
75 Rockefeller Plaza, 29th Floor
New York, NY 10019

Ann S. Moore, Chairman and CEO
Time Inc.
1271 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020


Dear Mr. Parsons and Ms. Moore,

We write to express our objection to AOL Time Warner’s use of work-for-hire contracts enforced upon its freelance contributors, writers and artists, who provide content for your magazines and other media products.

A fundamental principle in establishing the value of creative work is that the compensation must match how the work is to be used. Work-for-hire agreements circumvent this, taking not only the rights AOL Time Warner needs, but also all rights of authorship to the creative work. This strips your contributors of any future financial rewards from their own creations, violating the principle of copyright established in the US Constitution.

The dictate by AOL Time Warner for contributors to sign these contracts or lose any prospect of working for such a large media conglomerate is coercive in the extreme, and worthy of public outrage.

The Graphic Artists Guild (UAW local 3030) supports the position of the National Writers Union (UAW local 1981) and the City Council of New York in opposing your work-for-hire contracts, and will encourage its members, and those of our allied organizations, to resist such demands. We encourage AOL Time Warner to work with the organizations representing the creative community to develop contracts that respect the economic interests of individual creators, upon whom the success of your company relies.

Sincerely,


Lloyd Dangle
President
Graphic Artists Guild/ UAW local 3030
Cc: executive committee

[MaximumFluoride]

From the perspective of the Merch company this sounds like a good deal. They are a business. They are going to try and make as much as possible with as little investment possible. Thats the whole point of running a business correct?

I agree that it kind of screws the artist, but I mean I also understand the principles of business. This is a smart business descision for the merch company.

[slater]

This is a good subject for all of us to be aware of. The counter point here is: what does a designer with little experience do in a situation like this? What did some of you experienced guys do when you were getting started? I haven't been put into a situation like this, but if I was I think it would be hard for me to turn down work.

[RichieGoodtimes]

The merch company screws the band as well usually. It's a colossal fuckfest.