Flash Intellectual Property Rights on source files!!!

[MtraX]

Hi guys.

I was just wondering what your positions were on your Flash source files. We usually retain all rights to the source files since they contain our ActionScripting.

One recommendation I can make is that you insert a clause in your contracts about this. It may save you headaches and embarrassment in the future!!

MtraX

[Paulo]

Now that's an interesting point.

Have to say that I've never specifically thought about it, but I'm sure, by default, it's the design company's property unless otherwise agreed with the client.

The client is buying the .SWF which is really the by-product of the designers' .FLA source file.

However, how many headaches have occured when the original design firm no longer works and the client needs updates to work for which there is no source file? Spent many an hour completely redesigning stuff in order to add just one button to a nav system.

[J_Paul]

I think it is important that the client receive all of the source files for their site. I always give the full source files to my clients so they can have other designers update the site if I am unable to do so in the future.

As far as the action scripting. You can put comment tags in the flash file with your copywrite on it, but if you wrote it once, you can write it again.

It is all about the contract.

[citypublife]

How can you possibly justify retaining the rights to something the client has paid for. By default he pays for all the work you do, including the copyright unless you have already registered this copyright with the authorities.

If the client pays you to design something from scratch, including the source file, he has paid you for all of it, not just a piece of it, which is rendered useless if you no longer work for him.

You guys know what you are doing when you agree to design and build a site for somebody, the client doesn't. This issue should not be kept in the smallprint of a jargon filled contract that the client probably doesn't understand.

It is underhand to suggest keeping the source file if he paid you to write it. (If you added an existing source file that you had already written and have registered it, that is a different story).

[Paulo]

Thanks, citypublife. Will try not to be so underhand in future

[blastradius]

I would say that the client should recieve a copy of the source file and have a licence aggreement with the designer unless otherwise aggree to before hand. With Flash you essentially are purchasing software. And any software you buy in the store you don't really own the software you just have the rights to use it. So sell the client the right to use your code and your graphics while you retain the ownership of both. And as said earier comment your code with you copyright.

[mtheory]

Your actionscript?

This is definately a gray area.

I think you are trying to make Flash's scripting TOOL
a form of intellectual property or imaginative creation.

T's kind of like selling a car but you retain the right to the engine.

What is stopping a client from having the action script rewritten by another designer who will give them the source?

Although web design can be creative, it is far from being considered an artform that has significant aeshtetic or appreciable value.

Holding your work product hostage can end up being more trouble than it's worth.

[geekola]

I used to have a long paragraph on IP rights in my contracts, but the average Joe Blow didn't understand the concepts behind IP. They always thought I meant their site, graphics, etc. I got tired of explaining that it was the methods I owned and nothing else. I now do not include this paragraph. Joe Blow wouldn't know if you reused a method or not.

Intellectual Property (IP). Unless otherwise arranged, HyperLucid Web Services shall maintain ownership of Intellectual Property (IP) developed for the Client in connection with this Engagement Agreement. The Client shall have implied unlimited license to the IP, and shall use the IP at its own risk. HyperLucid Web Services has the right to sell or disperse the IP to any organization. HyperLucid Web Services is not required to ask permission from, nor inform the original funding Client that the IP is being reused.

[J_Paul]

Hi Chris,

That makes it sound like the client "could be" buying a template that can be resold to other clients. Isn't the point of hiring a designer is to have 100% original content?

I don't think I personally would sign a contract that I didn't own the property in which I just payed to have designed.

[geekola]

If I designed a new search algorithm on a project that say has 50,000 products in its database. I would maintain that I own the algorithm.

[geekola]

Or to be flash specific...it would be action script or custom built components. They are paying for the site, look and functionality.

[geekola]

When I quit working for Intel, I had to sign a multitude of IP agreements. A lawyer friend helped
me understand them...my argument is that all of the skills and methods I learned were mine to keep. Kind of like the tools and methods are mine and whatever I built with those tools and methods is theirs. Does that make sense?

[J_Paul]

Yes, that makes complete sense.

Say if I build an application here at work. I keep the knowledge of building it, but the actual application and code belongs to iEntry.

It's only fair to the company in my beliefs.

Say if I built something that we use every day. An application that is an iEntry application. iEntry wouldn't want me to keep the code and use it for other companies. Would you?

[geekola]

I am in agreement with you, but I would damn well reuse the methods in other contexts.

[citypublife]

Geekola

If they were paying you to design something for them and you included an algorithm in what you designed or built. It would become theirs because they were paying you for your expertise. The algorithm is part of that expertise. My belief is that it would now be theirs.

If Ferrari hired engineers to design tires that don't wear at high speeds. Ferrari own it, they paid for their expertise. Their contracts would ensure that and I would assume that it would stand up in court without a contract.

My point in an earlier post, is that people like me would not pay people like you for your knowledge and expertise if we already "owned" that knowledge and expertise. Therefore, we buy it from you, we do not rent it from you. All rights are ours. Action scripts, algorithms, code, the lot.

In the real world, "because most of us are not ferrari." You would retain the knowledge to use such algorithms, scripts code etc. again in other projects that you are commissioned to do.

You are not the only expert involved in the partnership. The guy you build all of this for and, who pays you lots of money, will have put just as much, if not more, sweat, blood and tears into the project as you. "Research, Marketing, Selling, Revenue etc. If the "partnership" dissolves, for whatever reason, and you decide that he doesn't get the .fla source file. It puts him out of business. That cannot be right.

[geekola]

I always deliver the source code...I may reuse the ideas and concepts I learned on the project.

[cinth]

This is all very interesting...
It seems that any work you do, whether "contracted" or not, has the potential to stretch your knowledge and capabilities. How can you NOT bring that knowledge into future projects?
The more tragic situation would be that you would come up with a kick-butt code, hand over the source code, and the next developer copies it and uses it in THEIR projects. Where is your protection? If you copyrighted the code, would that only protect it in its original format?

[macromike]

citypublife: The inverse can be observed in your ferrari analogy as well.

Let's say I am a homeowner and I have some stairs that need to be re-treaded and I want to add a ballista. Due to my limited carpentry skills I'm going to hire a carpenter who will come in, evaluate the situation, and give me a list of supplies needed for the job. These essentially are his source files, and his saws and sanders are his hardware.

At the end of the job any extra paint, brushes, or sandpaper...ect, is not mine to keep, but rather only the stairs and the new handrail.

-=rock on=-
-macromike

[citypublife]

Macromike

Although cute, in my opinion, your analogy does not stand up. If the guy took away his "...extra paint, brushes, or sandpaper...etc," and decided never to work for me again. I can go out and "easily" acquire new supplies. This is not the case with source files, action scripts etc.

If he takes these away, he is basically stopping me from developing my business, in effect, putting me out of business. This cannot be right.

I stand by my earlier comments. The source files etc. are mine, however, the knowledge and (copies) are the desgners to do with what he/she wishes.

[macromike]

Ok, so I can see your point, but how do we decide what 'source files' are easily obtainable and which aren't. It doesn't seem fair that some contractors have specific rights to the things they use to create, while others have to give up the fruits of their labor to be eventually violated by another designer.

I rarely do any video editing, but most the time video editors don't give up any of their source files, why should we(flash coders) have to?

I believe full heartedly in open source, but what I don't like is the mindless repurposing of prebuilt applications. If I spent how many ever hours writing reusable prototypes to simplify my development time, why should this benefit the next developer too?

If Lockheed Martin decided to build bombs for the airforce, I don't think they would give any extra weapons grade plutonium to the government, simply because of health and safety risks. Although I hope my source files aren't as dangerous as plutonium, I would like to think they can be harmful in the hands of a bad designer. :-)

[bret]

When you present someone with a web application, you have no choice but to give them your source files. The same is not true for a Flash piece/application. You can present the final piece without even touching the issue of source files. Think about it this way, when you pay someone to make an executable program for you, say it's written in C, do you give the employer your C files or just the .exe? i think that unless it's explicitly stated, you only present the final .exe file(s)

Because flash is, in the end, a compiled .swf, and not directly processing your .as or actionscript files (unlike an application that is build in PHP or ASP or whatever), the .swf is all that should be impiled by default (in a contract).

It comes down to intellectual property, but it also comes down to the function of Flash... (a source file for PHP or ASP is definitely different than the source file of Flash.) Because the source file acts as the processing file in unFlash web apps, you can't separate the two... but because you can with Flash, i think unless it's stated, they should be treated as two different elements in a contract (.fla and .swf)...

cheers,

bret

[citypublife]

Bret

Over 3 or 4 years I pay you £20,000 to build me a website, the payment is including all of your advice, script, fla. files etc etc.

We have an arguement, you think I'm wrong, I think your wrong. I decide to take my business elsewhere. You say, " tough luck, you have to fork out another £20K if you do and get somebody else to build you a new site".

I say, "Hold on Bret, if I hadn't worked my gonnads off over the last 3 or 4 years I would not have been able to pay you your £20K. Everything I have made has gone into the development of this site. Now you're taking it away from me".

You say "tough".

C'mon mate. There has got to be something wrong with that scenario.

www.citypublife.co.uk

[bret]

Originally Posted by citypublife

I say, "Hold on Bret, if I hadn't worked my gonnads off over the last 3 or 4 years I would not have been able to pay you your £20K. Everything I have made has gone into the development of this site. Now you're taking it away from me".

You say "tough".

C'mon mate. There has got to be something wrong with that scenario.

www.citypublife.co.uk

Well, i agree that there would be something wrong with that. But my point was not that employers should not have access or rights to the .fla files, it's that if they want them, they should have to specify in the contract; That the default position from a Flash developer (because of the nature of a Flash file) should be that only a packaged .swf should be expected.

Like [macro]mike said, how may times do video editors give up source files? Sometimes, i'm sure, but it was surely stated in the contract.

Again, i'm only saying that because of the nature of the .swf and the .fla, the it should be assumed that the .fla stays the property of the developer unless it's explicitly stated.

-bret