You probably know that hypernatic exists out of some divisions, we do hosting
but our design department is also well known for its productions.
Now some weeks ago we received a mail from one of our customers (which was a real jerk btw)
that we had to remove his site out of our portfolio at once.
He did not want to give a clear reason why we had to remove the site...
So our design department simply denied the request, which is fair of course.

Some days later I heard from a friend that he was furious that we didn't want to remove his
site.... the thing was:

What he did is he removed our footer ((C) hypernatic) and put his there instead.
The thing is that he want us to remove his site out of our portfolio because it looks weird
when customers see that the site actually was designed by hypernatic and not by EWS.

He tried to sue us, threatening with things like: "If I take a picture of you, and you refuse to let me put that in a magazine, I can not put that in our magazine".
Well, what he says is correct, in that situation only!! This is PRIVACY law but this does not apply to copyright law.
Since he does not have patent on the site he can not force us to remove his site from our portfolio.

Check: http://www.hypernatic.net/design.shtml and click on the portfolio and compare the EWS site with
http://www.ewsnl.com

What do you think?
I mean, we built the site for him, so why can't we show others what projects we've done in the past? Anyone care to give their opinion or maybe suggestions??

I can't access the site, and can't find the design in your portfolio...but:

If you sold him the design, then you sold him copyright too (unless you put in that he only had a licence to use it etc etc like software), so it is his choise as to whether you can display the site in your portfolio or not.

He can say no.

I allways ask my clients about whether I can put in my portfolio or not, safer and less confusion etc.

hth,
Douglas

Originally posted by hypernatic.net
Anyone care to give their opinion

Yeah...I love your work! :-)

Gary

Originally posted by DougBTX
I can't access the site, and can't find the design in your portfolio...but:

If you sold him the design, then you sold him copyright too (unless you put in that he only had a licence to use it etc etc like software), so it is his choise as to whether you can display the site in your portfolio or not.

He can say no.

I allways ask my clients about whether I can put in my portfolio or not, safer and less confusion etc.

hth,
Douglas

Douglas,

this is not true. I practice law myself and I asked many of my colleagues. He does NOT own copyright on this site, because for that he would have to register it which would costs him tons of money.

And besides all that, what he did was illegal too: "Misleading commercials" as we call it here in Holland.

Douglas, you have to go back in Hypernatic's portfolio to see Eagle Web Service (I think that's the name).

BTW, I probably could be wrong, but don't I own a design when I buy it?

Originally posted by Jedito
BTW, I probably could be wrong, but don't I own a design when I buy it?

Yes, you are what the call "The Rightfull Owner".
HOWEVER, this does not make the site copyrighted.

If you make a site, and have no copyright on it, and I completely rip the site, there is not much you can do... But then when you try ripping Microsoft.com - THERE is where you have a problem...

The law can be complex in this situation.

If he pay's you to complete a task, then either way, he owns the copyright in full.

Here in North America, you do not actually have to register a copyright with the copyright board, by creating a website, you automatically gain intellectual copyright.

If he paid you to complete a job, then legally he owns the copyright to the finished product. Here is a good example.

You are a programmer hired to develop a PC Game for another company. The publisher gives you funding and basically pay for the game's development. Now, you do not own the finished product, the publisher does. Simple as that.

Unfortunately, he can do whatever he wants with the site, as he is the legal copyright holder. Was a contract signed for this work, as it may go into detail with a "license" instead of a service, but unless it is present, he has all rights to ask you to remove the link.

-Shawn

Actually your both off, however, if he wanted to sue you, which he easily could, its just a matter of applying for a copyright on that site, their not *that* expensive, just take a while to process.

DanielP, you're right - if he wants to, he can... However, here in The Netherlands I think that would cost around $5000.

As for Shawn (GEcom), here in The Netherlands that is different, okay... But what you mean is usually a clausule in the contract...
Not the same thing...

Please don't get me wrong... Just wanted to hear what your oppinion was on this... My legal options I know already :)

Here is a few links to back up my statement:

http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/help/faq_cp-e.html#5
http://www.songwritersresourcenetwork.com/page31.html
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/ip/paulsmith/main/ttg/copyright.html
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:sKP_auGDowsC:www.scriptbuddy.com/privacy.html+Automatically+own+copyright&hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1
http://www.dnr.state.ak.us/standard/copyright.htm

Those were the first few links I found on Google. There are a lot more. Does the Netherlands support the Berne Convention?

http://www.law.cornell.edu/treaties/berne/overview.html

Although it is possible to sue without owning a certificate of copyright, it is much easier to do so with the certificate. He simply has to register the site with the copyright office.

-Shawn

Shawn,

I am sorry if I offend you in any way,
but do you really think that all my studies and my $400/hr lawyers would not know what they are talking about?

A few links mean dick to a team of lawyers with a whole lawteam and library backing them up...

Nothing personal, just that I want to make perfectly clear that there is nothing he can do... Besides register the site perhaps...

Just asking for oppinions...

$400/hr lawyer team! Whoa
If you can afford that, you shouldnt even be posting here.
thats my opinion.

oh, and, ermm dont petronize to other people. thats also important.

I didnt mean to patronize Shawn,

but I said numerous times that legal advise was not neccesary...
So I wanted to make perfectly clear that THAT was already arranged...

Originally posted by hypernatic.net
Anyone care to give their opinion or maybe suggestions??

You asked for opinions, and you got mine and Shawn's.

Basic answer: be nice to the guy and remove the item from your portfolio. Fin.

Douglas

The Item in our portfolio is what gets us new income
People want to see what we did in the past...

I am NOT gonna give up my income cause some guy changed his footer and now looks like a fool... Would YOU?

Originally posted by hypernatic.net
Would YOU?

I have done in the past ;)

After a site/logo/etc is completed, I am generally on good terms with the client because of the amount of communication to get it *exacty* right. Hence, I've never run into a problem with a client trying to claim that he/she did the design. Quite often, on the final version, I put "copyright whoever" on for them anyway.

You don't seem to be getting on very well, so I would just pocket the money and move on.

Ask next time ;)

Douglas

Originally posted by DougBTX

Ask next time ;)Exactly. Issues like who will own the copyright of the completed site and the maintenance of a portfolio link should be agreed to in advance and specified in the contract between the two parties. Your $400/hour lawyers should have told you that! :)

If that wasn't done, good business practice would say if he doesn't want to be linked you shouldn't link to him. For one thing, what if a potential client of yours follows that link to his site and asks him for a reference?

The approach I'd probably take is to link to an archived copy of the site -- on your own site -- instead of to the live version. We typically do that in cases where a client takes over maintenance and management of a site, because there's no longer any control over what they might do with it and we don't want their errors or poor design additions to be attributed to us.

We did take a screenshot and put that up.

We started putting that in our contracts a way back... But his site was done before that... Just recently he started to complain... :(

I am not an attorney, and I don't even play one of TV. :rolleyes:

I may be wrong about this, and things may have changed since the last time I read up about them, but I am under the impression that, in the U.S., the creator of a work-for-hire is the legal owner of the copyrights to that work unless they have signed a contract that gives the copyrights to the other party. I thought that's why most companies require those who do work-for-hire to sign copyright waiver forms as part of the employment contract, to ensure that the company owns the copyright to our completed work, because otherwise, we would own those copyrights.

If that is the case, then your company owns the copyrights to the Web site design that you created for that client unless you signed those rights away in the work-for-hire contract.

cbob is correct, in this country (USA) at least.

Originally posted by hypernatic.net
What he did is he removed our footer ((C) hypernatic) and put his there instead.

I mean, we built the site for him, so why can't we show others what projects we've done in the past? Anyone care to give their opinion or maybe suggestions??
What he did (remove the copyright) is illegal in the US, and as the owner of the work, you have the right to display it as an example of your work. WOuld you want to is another story (as someone said, you surely don't want a reference from this person).

Originally posted by DougBTX
If you sold him the design, then you sold him copyright too (unless you put in that he only had a licence to use it etc etc like software), so it is his choise as to whether you can display the site in your portfolio or not.
This is incorrect, as cbob stated. unless the contract specifiically gave the rights to the work to the purchaser, the work is owned by the creator. The customer has paid for the 'service' of designing the site, not for the actual design itself, nor for ownership rights to the work. This is automatic unless specified otherwise in the contract.

Originally posted by Shawn (GEcom)
The law can be complex in this situation.

If he pay's you to complete a task, then either way, he owns the copyright in full.

Here in North America, you do not actually have to register a copyright with the copyright board, by creating a website, you automatically gain intellectual copyright.

If he paid you to complete a job, then legally he owns the copyright to the finished product.
Again, the law (in the US) is quite clear on this. He paid you to complete the site, but he doesn't own it unless this is specified in the contract. If there is no contract that indicates ownership of the work (written or possibly spoken, though I wouldn't reply on spoken contracts for anything), then the default is, the creator owns the work and has all rights to it.

Edit: That isn't to say that text given to the designer by the customer becomes the property of the designer. If the customer wants to add 'copyright theirname 2002' to the pages to cover their written words on the page, that would be in line.

Here in North America, you do not actually have to register a copyright with the copyright board, by creating a website, you automatically gain intellectual copyright.

This is correct and hypernatic was the one who created the site.

Originally posted by JayC
Exactly. Issues like who will own the copyright of the completed site and the maintenance of a portfolio link should be agreed to in advance and specified in the contract between the two parties. Your $400/hour lawyers should have told you that! :)
This advice should be given to EWS, not hypernatic. It seems they are the ones who thought they owned the design and could remove the copyright.

Again, this is US law and I really don't know what applies to the Netherlands, if any of it doesn't apply, etc.

Chicken, FYI - Most of it applies here...

The issue is a customer and a vendor....it is by far best if a contract spells it out clearly so there is no misunderstanding. However, that not being done in this case (from at least the information given and the recognition later to add that to the contracts), regardless of whether you like the customer's asking you to not post his site on yours or whether you feel he is reasonable or unreasonable, good customer relations say that if he asks you not to post it, you abide by his wishes. Had you wanted different you should have made it clear up front.

And just a word of wisdom....I know nothing about your work...nothing about the site in question or its owner...but I would really hesitate to do business with you based on your posts here on this subject.

Last, this is just my personal opinion...nothing more, nothing less.

And, if you didn't want opinions, then I fail to see why you posted here.

I will refer to a book I have in my "mini" library at home. It's called Copyright Your Software" by attorney Stephen Fishman. He's written many books on copyright. The following pertains to software development, as well as creative works including web site design.

Re work done by an employee:
Copyrightable works created by an employee within the scope of employment are owned by the employer. Such works are called works made for hire. Not only is the employer the owner of the copyright in a work made for hire, it is considered to be the work's author for copyright purposes.

Re work done by an independent contractor:
The independent contractor, not the hiring party, owns the copyright in what he creates. This means that the hiring party must always require independent contractors to sign written agreements assigning their copyright ownership to the hiring party.

But from what I know, Holland is not a member of the Berne Convention, so I'm not sure how well their copyright laws hold up.

Just my 2 cents.

Vito

Definitely should have worked this out in the contract ahead of time. :)

Now, I say don't link to it or put it in your public portfolio if they don't want you to.

However, if you still own the copyright, I would at least demand that they keep your copyright mark on it.

Obviously you will make this more clear to your future customers, and do what you feel is fair this time, but that's my opinion.

Don't want to get on anyone's nerves, but as a response to the original question:
I think that the client should be accomodated. I think that in this specific case, since you actually compete with your client in one arena, it is somewhat unethical to openly advertise the fact that you designed their site. I think it should be the client's option to allow their site's display in your portfolio. Feel free to disagree with me, but in competitive business, I am sure many appreciate a certain degree of anonymity. In this case, the client's business would be compromised if there is a link at the bottom of the page to their competitors website. Does anyone agree with me?

According to my lawyer (who has worked with the Detroit Lions, Detroit Red Wings, and the Ford family in business issues).

If you went out and bought a copyright on the site, then there isn't even a need for a (C) on the page. Also in that case you dont have to do anything with the pictures on your site.

Surely your portfolio is large enough to keep the customer happy? Just do the right thing by them and remove it from your listing. You can always keep it in your set of links you send to people who enquire about your services after all.

Do your current design customers refer new work to you? I know ours do, and often due to the fact that when asked we don't 'tag' a site as our work. We also do work for other designers for the exact same reason. I mention this for a simple reason. Getting uppy about having one site listed in the portfolio may reduce the chance of picking up more work from the same client. It's a lot easier to get ongoing work than cold-selling your ability to new people.

To be perfectly frank, I couldn't really give a damn what the footer says, as long as we got paid for the job, it's used for it's intended purpose, and the customer's happy with the result. Not being able to see the forest for the trees will end up costing more income than it loses.

Greg Moore

This is amazing to me.
Of course you should remove the site from your portfolio.
What on earth are you thinking?

How much business are you going to lose through the bad publicity this client gives you?

For sure you have lost future work on his/her site.

I am curious if you hold your clients hostage if they get another web designer. Do you release the sites to them or do you tell the client..no way..we own it?

Is the hassle and the bad relations worth it? If the site is so important, put it up as a dmeo site, and take his company name off it.

This is just so unprofessional imho. It strikes me as ill thought out and where perhaps greed has overcome good sense.
I've been in that situation too and sometimes when potential dollars or sales are involved.. and one wishes one could do a thing a certain way what is RIGHT sometimes gets a bit obscured.

Deja

Ok,

listen to this. By law i have no obligations what so ever, I can do whatever I please.
This client has only caused trouble from the day we took the offer and we were friendly all the time, and we still are nice to him. All HE does is bitch and complain and threathen with lawsuits...
Ok and then he expects ME to be friendly? Okay, listen: The portfolio is my business, okay? If future clients want to see what we've done so far THAT is what I show them and THAT is what gets me customers... So I WILL NOT remove it because Mr. Unfriendly started bitching... I do NOT intend to lose income because of me being friendly, and him being not.

Nuff said.

PERIOD.

I think that if you point that out to everyone before you make a sale, then there should be no problem (i think you said that you do.) However, I think that removing one sample site will not affect your income at all. As akashik previously stated, you will probably loose potential referrals due to this.
As to the law in this matter, I think that your lawyers have already given you answers. Although, not everything that is legal is worth doing in business.

Seemingly, you're cutting off your nose to spite your face.

You can't see the forest for the trees.

Pick your battles wisely.

(Can't think of any more)

Nuff said.

The customer is not always right.

Some clients are much more trouble than they're worth. They never give referrals when they're happy; they just badmouth you to their friends if you don't let them to step all over you.

... and he was one of em :( sadly enough :( ....

I would never deal with your company with your attitude. Whether you or right or wrong...you come across as a real painful business association. Just my personal feeling on the matter.

Simon

Maybe you're right...
But please DO understand that this is a business and not a kindergarten... at least... for me it is...

All the more reason to make the right long term choices...

Originally posted by JayC
Exactly. Issues like who will own the copyright of the completed site and the maintenance of a portfolio link should be agreed to in advance and specified in the contract between the two parties.

Originally posted by Chicken
This advice should be given to EWS, not hypernatic. It seems they are the ones who thought they owned the design and could remove the copyright.That the client may be on the wrong side of this doesn't change the point: these issues should be clarified, agreed on and put in writing at the beginning of the relationship. Not doing so has risks for both sides, as this incident points out. A clear contract isn't created just to protect your rights; it's also there to avoid arguments and litigation.

So the advice is valid for them both!

true...

see thing is, maybe for you it dont matter much, since there are a lot of designers here who do designs for quite attractive prices... we however don't even CONSIDER starting for less than $1000 (ex sales tax) - NOTE!!! NO OFFENSE WHAT SO EVER so dont start flaming plz

things like this are not worth my time (those clients) and I was just wondering how you guys felt...
FYI, we have a very highly recommended name and we are famous for our work, thank you. Like I said, a customer who is a pain from the beginning and talks **** all the time and spits fire in your face IS JUST NOT WORTH ANYONE'S TIME!!

I hope you all get my point.
I love to do business, I mean, hey it's money... So I'll do whatever it takes to make money... If the clients wants me to kiss his ass clean, damn I'll LICK it clean if he wants to... But THESE things go to far, we give him a great deal on a design, he bitches all the time, THEN he starts this on me... THATS where I say STOP... I hope you all understand...

Originally posted by hypernatic.net
Maybe you're right...
But please DO understand that this is a business and not a kindergarten... at least... for me it is...

Then why are you being so childish about it. Remove his link...the only reason you want to keep it is so you win....well there is one lesson in life that you should learn early....You can't win them all! You are now in a no win situation.

Simon

I see the point you are trying to make,
but compare this:

I have to "defend" my work and show people what I make,

vs.

He doesnt want to look like a complete fool since he put "design by ****" there....

You decide...

see thing is, maybe for you it dont matter much, since there are a lot of designers here who do designs for quite attractive prices... we however don't even CONSIDER starting for less than $1000 (ex sales tax) - NOTE!!! NO OFFENSE WHAT SO EVER so dont start flaming plz

I'm not sure what your average project price has to do with this. If you're so well known, and you have that many clients, it shouldn't bother you to have just 1 less sample in your portfolio.

It just seems you are "standing on ceremony" on this one. Seemingly, there is no real loss for you if the link is removed, and if the site is removed from your portfolio. From what you say, there are plenty of other jobs you've done that can adequately speak for your abilities.

Remember, 1 satisfied customer will tell 5 people. But 1 dissatisfied customer will tell 20.

I can't disagree with that,

however, HE is the one who wanted to start a lawsuit,
now I say this:
1) He can't
2) What HE does is (at least in our country) illegal...

Get MY point here?
I mean, HE wants to play hard, no biggie.... I'll just do whatever the client wishes, play along...

however, HE is the one who wanted to start a lawsuit,

Unfortunately, there are many people in this world who decide to launch a lawsuit, regarless of their chances to win.

I mean, HE wants to play hard, no biggie.... I'll just do whatever the client wishes, play along...

Why even show up to the ball game? Let it go. Write it off as a difficult customer (we all have them) and direct your energies to building your business.

Ok I agree...

I just hope you understand the situation, that's all I ask, I don't even ask for you to AGREE :)

Anyway, vito, I must say that your reply is one of the few neutral and wise replies...

BTW: I keep having "Can not connect to server" all the time with WHT... anyone else have this problem?

You asked for opinions in your first post. Here's mine:
You're wrong.

Not speaking legalities; just talking basic customer relations.

[/ my opinion]

I would completely agree with you, IF the customer had been a good and nice and professional customer...

Then yeah, heck you would be right as hell... However, if someone starts kicking you and beating you in the face, you just let em?

The easiest way of losing a lawsuit is to do nothing!!

Originally posted by hypernatic.net
if someone starts kicking you and beating you in the face, you just let em?

In this case, you just move out of their reach. :rolleyes:

Remove the site from your portfolio, and end relations with him.

BTW, I understand your issues here :D

You know what I'm thinking? I keep on seeing the title of the thread....> How Pathetic!


hth,
Douglas

Originally posted by hypernatic.net
. . . . . .

The easiest way of losing a lawsuit is to do nothing!! But, if you would have honored the customers' simply request, you wouldn't even be concerned with a lawsuit.

Seems to me what you are doing is like:

Making a site for a costumer - > Costumer bitches - > costumer asks request -> you deny request and KEEP THE BITCHING ARGUEMENT.

WHY NOT JUST GET RID OFF IT?

From all choices you could have made, business wise, you made the wrongest one. thats my opinion.

Ok, well we've all gotten our opinions in, it is up to hypernatic to decide what to do.