Whether it is, or is not WFH ... the phrase that pays is:
"All that should be spelled out in detail in the contract."
Especially the part about the client actually owning the rights to the
artwork you're being asked to photograph. You don't want to be liable if
it turns out the client does not in fact own the rights.
From: David Parsons
Unless the contract specifically states that you are working under a
work-for-hire, you shouldn't assume that the job is automatically WFH.
The Copyright act has very specific conditions that qualify for WFH.
http://masslawblog.com/copyright/the-work-for-hire-trap/
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf#search=%22work%20for%20hire%20nine%20categories%20copyright%20act%22
The short answer, talk to a lawyer that is versed in copyright or IP law.
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 7:02 PM, John Sessoms <[email protected]> wrote:
Assuming the client owns the rights to the artwork, I think you're looking
at "work for hire", and the person who is hiring the work done will own the
rights to the photographs. You may want to retain some rights to use the
image for self promotion. All that should be spelled out in detail in the
contract.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
