>>if getting the contract means enough to you that you're willing to
>>hand over the copyright as part of the deal, i'd say they're within
>>their rights to pull your logo from the page.
>
>It's important to remember that unless you sign away a right, you own it.
good point, Suz..
i was referring to a situation where Linda was willing to sign over
whatever rights the client demanded, for an additional fee or not [1], but
didn't state it clearly. frankly, that was wrong of me. the assignment
of rights is very important, and shouldn't be handled casually.
[1] - the jerk is being rude to a member of my tribe.. my first reaction
would be to kick the price up so high he'd have to hock a testicle to
afford it. OTOH, it's easy to be tough with somebody else's negotiations.
hold out for what you can get, Linda, but if you decide the money makes a
less-than-perfect deal worth taking, we'll be here with the sympathy when
you need it.
>>they have to put up with your logo.. they can't claim any rights of
>>ownership if they refuse to take posession.
>
>Personally, I think this is a weak position. What if the client suddenly
>decides that he'd rather keep your logo on his site than pay you that last
>$5000 he owes you? More useful might be a password protection scheme as
i wasn't thinking of the logo as the mechanism to guarantee payment, but
again, on an N+1th reading, i can see that my wording was unclear. the
methods you suggested are significantly more mature, and something as
trivial as pulling a logo can't begin to compete.
what i was shooting for was a situation where removing the logo is part of
the ritual of closure for this specific project. Linda's post indicated
that the client was gung-ho on that issue, so i took their motivation to
get the logo off the pages as a given. it's not the kind of thing i'd
suggest as a general policy, because like you say, Suz.. another client
might not give a dang.
to unpack a couple other basic principles i didn't bother to mention last
time, i agree with the other people who've posted, saying that the general
situation makes them uneasy. clients who aren't willing to flex at the
beginning tend to become miserable, bitchy, back-street legalists at the
end.
in circumstances like that, it's essential to get everything in writing up
front. but equally important are the rituals of delivery and acceptance,
which provide closure at each step along the way. the specific actions of
a ritual are unimportant, as long as they have the following qualities:
- easy to identify
- unlikely to happen by accident
- both sides agree *beforehand* on what the ritual means
signing a contract is probably the most common ritual there is. if you
think about it, writing your name on a piece of paper is a lousy way to
guarantee good behavior. it's vulnerable to forgery, lying, and almost
any other form of dishonesty, but we literally shape our lives that way.
the authority doesn't come from the act of signing, but from the fact that
everyone knows, and agrees to support, the ritual.
when you have to deal with difficult clients, the best thing you can do is
make up some kind of ritual for absolutely every step in the process.
everyone on this list has been around the block enough times to know what
happens on a project: you do the initial design work, then the client
fails to deliver content, or refuses to make a decision, or suddenly
decides to take about twelve steps back and start again.
if you have a good set of clearly-defined rituals at each step along the
way, it gives you a trail of accountability. that comes in very handy
when you get into the last few weeks, where everything is still only
half-done, and the client starts trying to dump all the blame on you.
as long as you've done your part for each step, and they've participated in
the ritual where you handed responsibility back to them, you're in the
clear. if there hasn't been a subsequent ritual where they handed things
back to you, they have to admit their own fault, rather than pinning it on
you.
if it goes to the worst case, you have something which is admissible in
court. in my experience, though, things don't escalate that far. the
fact that the client *knows* you can stand up and document your deliveries,
and their own failures, makes legal action the last thing they want to see
happen. that becomes another bargaining chip on your side, as the
deadline gets closer and tensions begin to rise. it's especially
effective on bad clients, who are basically bullies. they attack without
fear as long as they're stronger, but suck up like champs when they're
weaker.
it's also good to have a range of different rituals, all working at the
same time. if you demand a signature for everything, it can put people
off, and then they start buiding their own documenation trail. if you use
some other type of action.. removing a logo in this case.. the ritual is
still valid (and still admissible, if necessary), but doesn't trip their
defenses until, frankly, it's too late.
mike stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 'net geek..
been there, done that, have network, will travel.
____________________________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Join The Web Consultants Association : Register on our web site Now
Web Consultants Web Site : http://just4u.com/webconsultants
If you lose the instructions All subscription/unsubscribing can be done
directly from our website for all our lists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
