I have approached a web development company to rebuild my website.

My initial impression was that they would build this then hand it over to me. I understand though that they will retain the intellectual property rights and provide me with a life time license. This means that the website will have to remain on their server even if I decided to sell it.

Is this now the standard approach to developing web applications or is this an unusual arrangement?

Thanks

Neil

RUN FORREST RUN!!!
While it sounds good for the designer it doesn't sound good for you. I'd go find someone else. There are plenty of designers that will do the project and turn everything over to you.

Need more details about the application.

I have CMS apps that run on some of my clients sites, and they pay a monthly fee to use it. If they cancel the lease of the application I remove the app from their site.

Do you want to pay $15k+++ for the application or do you want to pay $50/mon ...

I don't know if that is the situation, but this is an example of how something like that can work.

__________________
www.corporateface.com
Custom Website Design
No Templates

Hosting and designing are two separate issues. While the two can be combined, there is really no good reason (for you) to do that and a lot of good reasons not to do that. You, the web site owner, should be in complete control of the three main parts of your web site:

1. The domain name
2. Hosting
3. Designing

To have the three done by different entities allows you, the owner, to be in control. Domain names are easily transferred from one registrar to another. Hosting can be done by one or more different companies. Designing the site can be done by one or more parties. For instance, if you allow the host to also control the domain name, it can cloud the ownership of the domain name.

Keep it all simple by keeping it all under your control.

__________________
DrTandem's San Diego Web Page Design, drtandem.com

Agreed ... Always register your own domain names.

As a customer, you should shop around for hosting.
As a designer, ... depending on the details of what you are having done to your website ... I would not necessarily call this a red flag. Especially if you are trying to get something inexpensively.

__________________
www.corporateface.com
Custom Website Design
No Templates

Well this post has two issues to it
assuming we are talking about site creation not hosting

1) is this common practice.. ??
while not common it is the legal default as I understand it (unless it has changed recently) is that the person who creates the design or code owns it and you are paying for their service.. IE unless you have it in the contract that you own it technically the company who created it does.. this means if you walk they can keep your site..

NOW this brings me to q2
2) what does this mean ?
well it could mean one of two things and only you know these people so for you to judge .. they could be badly wording that you do have the right to your code - OR - and because they want you to host on their servers .. this seems more likely.. that they have some small line item that allows for them to cancel that lifetime license.. or allows them to charge you for it or.. or .. or .. most likely there is a caveat -

when I do design I sign it over the customer in the contract.. as an act of good faith.. if they won't do that then I would probably decline using them...

just my 2 cents ;)

I register, design, and host for almost all of my clients. I haven't had a problem yet. If someone wants to transfer their site to another host I gladly comply. It is easier for me to register the domain so I don't have to go through the hassles of transferring. They are listed as owner of the domain with me being the technical contact. No ownership issues arise. I just find that it's easier for me and the client if I can provide all three services. Of course, I'm a good guy and wouldn't hold anyone's site hostage.

__________________
emsee designs, inc.
visual designs for print and the web
http://www.emseedesigns.com

Again, it depends on what you're getting. Proprietary code written so that you can manage the site yourself is the biggest reason why a design firm might use this type of approach. But it will tie you to them and to whomever buys them if they decide to sell their business (I would ask what assurances you have that this won't happen).

Otherwise, find a designer who can do it all for you but keep you as the owner of the domain and the website. We frequently register domain names for clients (in their company name), share the log in information with them whenever asked, host their site and give them FTP access if they request it, as well as design and maintain the site.

Shop around. There are some good deals out there and you don't have to tie yourself to one company.

Maintaining creative rights is an old ad agency thing - even photographers used to maintain rights to photos taken for clients. Today, not too many people will sit still for that kind of control. When I was an advertising manager I always insisted that we own the photography and the photography was licensed to use them.

__________________
MAWells
www.web-kare.com

As a designer, I can understand the standpoint. But, the way our contracts are worded is that all of the IP is owned by us on the grounds that it is our code. We wrote it, we have full rights to it (to use it again, to sell it, etc) while the client has no actual rights to resell our software or design. They can, however, sell off their domain, including our software/design, and the owner is responsible for the software agreement (always included in the software/design files somewhere).

Our standpoint is that if we are compensated for a design, the person who paid us owns it, unless we otherwise negotiate it.

Like said above, run the other way. This is not a good deal for you - only for the company in question.

__________________
Is your website ready for swimsuit season? Check us out:
Website Design

No, it's not standard. I wouldn't recommend this as a buyer unless the company offers something very unique.

__________________
B.J.Baker
Adventure Travel Adventure Sports
Industrial Supply

I agree with the RUN! statement.

The STANDARD is that you own the rights to what was produced and paid for. Just like you own your own house after you pay for the contractor to build it. He doesn't give you a lifetime license to live in your house.

HOWEVER, this also means that the designer can use the materials in a portfolio unless you specify otherwise.

What I believe they are trying to do is prevent YOU from turning around and using the graphics etc that they created for purposes other than what was the original intent ie the website. So you will not be able to sell a graphic for instance to another person for use on another site.

The other angle they are going at is that you can not sell the website without going through them first. I'm betting that the lifetime license is null and void in this case and whoever buys the site would have to pay a HUGE fee to get the "rights" to it. Or you pay a huge penalty.

IF they are insisting it be hosted on THEIR server and they are providing the domain name, this is a clear warning that they may be up to no good. What is happening out here in the cold cruel world is exactly what you are saying. BUT if your site is a smash hit, the company comes in and takes it away from you. After all, it is THEIRS. All of it. You pay them to build it. Then you do all the work of promoting it and getting it successful and suddenly it belongs to them and you have no legal recourse.

DO NOT DO THIS.

Go to Godaddy.com and purchase your domain names. Host it there too if you want. THEN get a design team that will provide you with the files. Don't let them have access to your account either. They could change your password and demand money for giving it back to you.

Let them send you the files after demoing them on their server. Then you upload them. Unless you can give them seperate FTP account that is.

__________________
Freelancers Gone Wild | Save money on gasoline! | Let them Eat Salad

Wether the client knows it or not, all of the creative assets, text content, and programming methodologies is owned by the development company.

I have debated this issue for a decade now, and each time it comes up, I give the Wedding Photographer analogy...

When you hire a wedding photographer, you are paying for their services and you pay extra for the prints. The copyright and intellectual property is theirs and this is actually how they make a profit. The reprints from the negatives are the property of the photographer, and anyone who wants duplicates of the photos needs to go through them.

The same thing applies to web sites and other designed property... Unless the web designer signs a contract that says the sources files and code will be turned over to the client along with a transfer of copyright ownership, then the work belongs to the designer.

The only way the work is the property of the client is if the job was a "Work for hire"... such as being a full-time employee or having a designer do a commissioned piece... and their should still be a contract signed in both instances.

rp

We recommend that our clients use Joomla, which is an open source CMS that can do pretty much anything from ecommerce to real estate to blogs, etc. This means the client OWNS the software, design, images, etc. Or course, we make it SEO and SMO from the start so there is no retro-fitting later.

If you desire to leave for any reason, we pack the site up and send it to you.

We prefer this model as it's based on performance of Serr.biz and client satisfaction not handcuffs.

As a business owner, you DO NOT want to be locked into any one developer or design. What if someone dies, or just raises their rates 100%? Then what? You have to start over?

Michael Zittel
Serr.biz LLC
80.556.7449

__________________
Serr.biz - Ethical SEO,SEM and Blog marketing
Comprehensive e-brand marketing.
Call 800.556.7449 for a free consultation.

I have similar terms for my clients. However each service is independant of the other. Clients are never obligated to maintain hosting or maintenace with my company. I do require that I and respective companies retain rights to the coding & original design used for the site.
I have run into situations where my design etc. has been credited by another designer. This designer then acquires new clients as a result of my work. If a client wishes another company/person to maintain the site they are required to state "Site maintained by.." rather than stating developed by...
It is a lot of work to create websites according to a clients wishes. I will never feel it is right for someone else to take credit. In order to protect my work I have to require agreement to my terms.

...the client is automatically assigned rights to use as a web site the design, graphics, and text contained in the finished assembled web site. Rights to source code, work-up files, and computer programs are specifically not transferred to the client, and remain the property of their respective owners.

This works both ways... if I take over someone elses site I require permissions and will never state I developed the site.

Due to the number of unethical web developers many companies are forced to create terms that may seem unreasonable.

__________________
Website consulting and design for...
small business, home based companies, personal or hobby websites
http://twopooches.com/

Thanks for the feedback. Basically I have been running www.galleries-online.co.uk, which I built from scratch using Colfusion, for some years now. I'm not particularily advanced and do not have the time to learn the skills to take the website onto the next level.

My friend's company have been building coldfusion web applications for 10 years and have developed a comprehensive application framework over those years.

The idea will be that they redesign and redevelop the whole website using this application framework (I think that's the right term). I will pay an initial fee for the development and design and then a small subscription for hosting and maintainence.

The advantages are that the application can be built quickly using tried and tested components which are regularily updated in line with the latest upgrades. There is also the advantage of handing all aspects of the develoment and maintainence over to another company leaving me with the space to focus on marketing and business development.

The disadvantage of course is that I am tied to them. I'm not planning to sell the website in the near future but I would like to know whether the value of the website would be reduced significantly if the buyer is tied to the same arrangements.

cheers

Neil

forget about the discussion...just start giving me work and you dont even have to ask this question again on the forum :) muhahaha

now guys..dont start flaming me for this reply :P

__________________
CEO - Hashe Computer Solutions
Director I.T - American Personal Chef Association
Domain Registration & Hosting - Domain Pile Inc.

No, No, No, don't do that if you can possibly avoid it - they've got you locked in.

Unless they have some special system or service you absolutely need, you shouldn't cede that sort of control to them, as they've got you over a barrel.

I recently did a site rebuild for someone locked into that sort of arrangement: CMS licence, hosting and "support" was costing £1500/year (that's roughly $3000 to you Americans) for a fairly standard site. Support was negligible - every time they asked for help it was always "oh no, that's not covered, and that'll be a day at £500 / $1000..."

Keep the ownership of your site, and make sure you use a system that is developer independent (in case he goes bust, or you fall out), and that you can move to a new host if you wish.

Make sure that any contract you sign with a developer ultimately assigns all copyright and IP to you - we have a retention clause that states we own everything until paid in full, after that copyright and all IP becomes the client's.

The fact that you're on this forum suggests that you aren't comfortable with what's been offered - so I'd follow your instinct, because its a recipe for much future unhappiness.

__________________
Clarrie
-------------
www.dvisions.co.uk - focus on the ball

Yes, I agree -- this is not how I work and in most cases I would suggest that you do not agree to this type of contract. But there are some legit reasons to do it this way.

Sounds like an inexpensive site made from templates (or customized templates) run by a proprietary back end. With something like this you could get a lot of good features quickly and relatively cheaply. And it would be pretty impossible for them to just give you a copy of it if you want to go somewhere else. Another reason they may be doing it this way is that they are charging next to nothing for the design and they recoup it in hosting.

The downside to this sort of site is that, however little money you sink into it, you've lost it if you are unhappy. And even though you may have access to a lot of features, because they are not custom made for you, they may not work exactly how you want them to.

I'd only consider it if you really trust this company and they are giving a great product that serves all your needs for a good price. It could be a great way to get a site up quickly when you can't afford something custom.

__________________
Marc Grobman
quixo web + graphic design | my punk pottery art opening |