Work-for-hire: easy money or the devil's handshake?

A new resource popped up via Spencer Cross, principal of L.A.-based design firm Tokyo Farm, and founder of KERNSPIRACY, a mailing list/meatspace mashup of graphic designers, illustrators, web developers and other creative solopreneurs.

It's called StopWorkForHire.com, and, as you might expect, it makes the case against accepting any work-for-hire agreements not just because they stand to screw you out of a lot of deserved income and recognition, but because they undermine the entire profession by devaluing the real work that graphic designers do when they develop designs for clients.

What's different about this site is the how starkly the case is made, and with what a level, clear-headed tone. I especially like the very explicit outlining of what work-for-hire is and, more importantly, is not: there are a lot of shady companies out there who will happily exploit your agreement via signature to a contract that otherwise would not be legally enforceable. Yowsa.

I railed on the KERNSPIRACY list about all this stuff and was kind of shocked that there wasn't more of a lively debate. Usually, people speak pretty passionately about this stuff, on one side or the other. I'm wondering to what I should attribute the radio silence: people thinking it's a non-issue?; not caring?; or maybe that in these especially shaky economic times, it's better to suck it up and take it?

I may be opening the floodgates, here, but hey—what's a blog for? You know where I stand on the issue (and if you don't, well, I signed the pledge against taking work-for-hire); where do you stand, and why?

Let 'er rip in the comments!

Comments

[Judy Dunn]

When I was a young, and starving, writer, I did agree to a work-for-hire project. I learned a valuable lesson. There are people out there who will take everything you give them without thinking once about the unfairness of it all.

It was in southern California and it was scripts for an animated children's television show. I mean, this was scriptwriting from the ground up, including developing the characters! I was paid $150 per script, as I recall.

The show was never sold to a network, as far as I know. But he could have done that and I would have received no part of the revenues. During this same time, I did this with a children's book, understanding that my name would also be on the book and they removed any mention of me!

I don't know why, but creatives seem to be the target of this kind of abuse more frequently than other professionals. Not sure why. Whether they don't value what we do or they just don't want to pay for it. But for me, I was young and was just happy that anyone would pay me for something I love to do. I think they take advantage of that.

Great topic, Colleen. I'll be interested in hearing about other people's experiences and perspectives.

[Jasmine Holmes]

I recently turned down a project because the client had a work-for-hire clause in the contract. I'll admit that I didn't bat an eye at it at first because I didn't realize exactly what work-for-hire meant. (Isn't every job pretty much work-for-hire? Someone hires me to complete a work for them right?)

Fortunately, something told me too have the contract reviewed by a lawyer. She explained to me the dangers of the work-for-hire provision and that along with some other issues made me realize that my client was trying to take advantage of me. I politely gave her the brush off and am glad that I did.

Work-for-hire is especially dangerous for web designers (like me) because we reuse so much of the code we work with. Every project looks different on the outside but a lot of the inner workings are similar from project to project. I could not profitably work if every client owned their code and I couldn't reuse it.

[communicatrix]

Judy - I did my fair share of scut work when I first started writing but man, that is truly awful!

Speaking of creative artists who get screwed, actors fall firmly in that camp. I worked a couple of non-union student films on the sly, to build my reel, and it quickly became obvious why unions are a good thing, at least when it comes to the protection of life and limb.

The only good thing is that they can't take the actor's work, other than screwing them out of residuals. Which they do, regularly.

Jasmine - That's a good point about the code; hadn't thought of it.

It blows my mind when people ask for files, or for all the "other" work that you did that wasn't the final thing they contracted for. I'm trying to think of an analogy outside of the design world, like the guy who drew the cartoon lambasting free and spec work did b/w design and cars: who'd expect to get a free car? Yet people for some reason think design should be free b/c all you're doing is whipping up a little something.

Ugh. How to educate?

[Judy Dunn]

Oh, Colleen. Don't get me started on acting. Yes, unions are a good thing. But my daughter had a recurring role on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno (she was a dead ringer for Monica Lewinsky...say no more) and they wouldn't give her any more than, was it seven words, something like that, or they would have to pay her union (SAG) rates). A little off the work-for-hire topic but, again, using young creatives.

Education? Your link to StopWorkForHire.com is a start. I'll be promoting this to my readers.

[Colleen Wainwright]

I don't know what contract Tonight Show works under, but it may be AFTRA--by far, the lousier of the two unions, especially as concerns the rank-and-file.

Not to say things would have been much better under SAG governance, if that's the contract Tonight Show works. But SAG's pay scale is more generous, probably in part b/c they don't let just anyone into the union.