Hello folks,

 

This is my first post on this site....

 

I'am a relatively inexperienced freelance designer - possibly in a spot of bother.

I was approached by a company at the begining of this year, i was asked to modfiy their existing website.

The changes were minor, and related to the aspethics of the site. They are running a fairly need CMS.

 

This week "they" (my client) recieved an email from the company who did the original work, stating these changes had broken copyright law, and violated his Intellectual Property.

 

Needless to say this is a little worrying!

 

However, the original site had the © symbol, 2006 and the name of my client - suggesting to me they own the copyright.

Also in the footer was a line designed and hosted by xxxx (the original designer) I left this line in tact.

 

Any sugestions as to what my next move should be, have i broken copyright laws?

 

Im a little confused, and feel responsible to sort this for my client.

 

Many thanks

This sounds like a company pissed off because the client went for the cheaper option. Re-occuring changes are the good stuff for many design firms (with new projects being the bread & butter) and so they protect them quite viciously.

 

However, unless the design firm can prove that they still own the copyright, or the client can prove that he bought the design rather than just the right to use the design, then you will reach a stalemate.

 

Basically, call the design firms bluff and say "prove it".

Ok sorry for DP, but in the event that the design firm can prove it, DO NOT GIVE A REFUND. There is no legitimate reason for you, and the work was paid for, in terms of your effort, not on the usability of the finished piece.

 

It is not your fault if the copyright was unclear at the time of your commision.

Hi Penguin,

Thanks for the quick reply.

Your thoughts echo mine somewhat, and i feel they are a little grumpy as a result of not getting the next years hosting contract, which was absurdly high!

 

 

Here is a quote from the orginal site

 

The content (content being images, text, sound and video files, programs and scripts) of this website is copyright © "xxxx"

 

(xxx being my client)

 

Are you suggesting its a clients responsibility to ensure the legality of their site?

As php_penguin said this isn't an issue for you. You did as you were contracted to. This is between the original designers and the company to fight over who owns the copyright and that will come down to the contract between them.

Hi Daemon, thanks for the reply - thats reassuring!

If you haven't already, make sure your contacts clearly states that it's the responsibility of the client that all material that's handed to you belongs to them and you're allowed to use it. Just to make sure.

Very good point, Thomas. This is most important when the client is providing you images (which they almost always "borrow" from other websites!) but here is another instance when this contract clause will save you.

 

Also in the footer was a line designed and hosted by xxxx (the original designer) I left this line in tact.

 

What everyone else said about the copyright being the client's problem is spot on, but this sentence bothered me a bit. You're right, it is probably sour grapes over losing the hosting contract. But if I had designed a site for someone and another designer had been paid to change it, I wouldn't want to be responsible for those changes. This is especially true if the new designer did some ugly graphics, bad code, or otherwise broke the site (not saying this is you) - and it looks like I did it! This would reflect negatively on the original company. Then again, I also wouldn't want credit completely stripped... a conundrum.

You know, I don't think those changes have actually broken any copyright law to be honest. There is a 'modify without permission' clause within the copyright act but this applies to modifying content and distributing it which is not what you've done.

 

I think you should ask your client to provide you with a copy of the contract they had with the previous designers because if there wasn't one then just the process of the client 'buying' the site can be deemed as transfer of copyright, especially if the site resides on the clients own servers and the inclusion of the copyright notice.

 

If there is a specific contract, check what the company can do with the website since this is the only place where any copyrights would have been asserted.

 

It should be noted that copyright always resides with the creator of the work unless otherwise stated though.

 

I have a solution to the problem though. It might be an idea to suggest to your client that, to percent this problem happening again, you re-design the site for them. Give them a small discount and make sure you transfer the copyright to them in your contract. If you push it as "never having this problem again" then they might go for it, you would get a little more work from them and the previous designer would be scuppered.

Well, if it said there "© copyright - and company's name" the company that made the website doesn't has copyright on it. they've designed the website for them, they were paid to do that, and after they finished designing it, contract ended.

Well, if it said there "© copyright - and company's name" the company that made the website doesn't has copyright on it. they've designed the website for them, they were paid to do that, and after they finished designing it, contract ended.

 

 

This is what i thought. the company owns the design, the designers were contracted to come up with the design then sell it to the company surely? is this how it works?

Depends on the contract that they signed. Some design/hosting companies like to have a tight leash, so they say, we will host your site once we have designed it but you have to pay us to change the site, you cannot use anyone else. Sound stupid but if they are offering a good deal on design and then throw in hosting as well, some companies see this as a good deal. Then when they realise how much it is costing for updates reconsider this. I only know of this as a friends company went in for this sort of deal and was unable to change the design or even update what was written on it, all had to be done through the company which would charge £50 for a slight text update...they also had to have as part of their agreement links to every other site this company were hosting. After the year contract was up they swiftly moved to another host and got someone to do their site, and then updated it themselves, they may be paying more for hosting now, but at least they have freedom to do what they want on their own site.