The "Work For Hire" Doctrine Almost Never Works in Software Contracts

Re:The "Work For Hire" Doctrine Almost Never Works in Softwa... by jschulenklopper on Tuesday May 27, 2014 @03:39AM (#7803346)

> "Hey can we have IP assignment happen only after SoW's associated invoices have been paid in full?"

Normally: yes. For more explanation on this, see Mike Monteiro's great presentation during a CreativeMornings event: http://vimeo.com/22053820. Most of us will recognize the talk by the title alone: "F*ck You. Pay Me."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The "Work For Hire" Doctrine Almost Never Works in Softwa... by yangmeyer on Tuesday May 27, 2014 @04:03AM (#7803414)

The best thing about this "assign after payment in full" clause: It makes potential disputes about unpaid invoices a copyright infringement issue. And crucially, legal costs for copyright cases in the US are paid by the infringing party.

(IANA lawyer, but I learned this from one while contracting.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The "Work For Hire" Doctrine Almost Never Works in Softwa... by Argorak on Tuesday May 27, 2014 @06:39AM (#7803769)

The most important part is that it avoids many cases where the client tries to "ship off" the software. (e.g. by selling it to another party for a penny and going bankrupt itself)

This is in some cases fraudulent in itself, but being able to block the sale is a much clearer case.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The "Work For Hire" Doctrine Almost Never Works in Softwa... by ehurrell on Tuesday May 27, 2014 @04:15AM (#7803442)

This is exactly what I was going to post, it's an excellent talk. As Mike says a good contract is good for both the client and the worker, as it ensure everyone is on the same page. It only takes being burned for trusting people once to realize a good contract can be a lifesaver.

[ Parent | on HN ]