copyright of commissioned graphic artwork

[qking]

I've commissioned a artist to create some artwork for me. He now refuses to make some changes that I've requested (simple stuff like changing fonts and colors). So I requested the AI files so that I could make the changes myself.

Long story short, he now is backing away from the project, saying that I cannot use any of his artwork that has already been completed and that he has copyright rights to the stuff. No actual contract, though he has received partial payment.

Do I have rights to the work? If I get another artist to work on something similar would there still be issues of copyright.

[stapel]

I think the ownership of the created work is disputable, because you didn't get a contract with this guy. He created the work, so he could be said to own the copyright. But you were paying him for the work, so it might be a "work for hire", so you could be said to own the copyright.

For now, I think your options are (1) start over with somebody else or (2) sic a lawyer on this guy, using the proof you have of partial payment. And (3) always get a signed contract in the future.

Eliz.

[voices]

It is pretty standard in the graphics industry that the copyright stays with the creator.

Some designers will never release the original file, that is their right. Others will release it when final payment is made.

Why does he not want to make the requested changes?
Is he refusing to make changes or just requesting more money for changes?

Your money should be refunded if he is not going to complete the project as agreed.

I would talk to a lawyer since it seems his refusal to finish the project is a breech of contract.

[crescenta]

I agree with voices. I believe he still owns the copyright--I'm not a lawyer, but it is my understanding that he has to specifically sign away his rights, and it looks like he hasn't done that. You can't force him to give up his copyright, no matter how much you huff and puff.

However, it doesn't seem right that he's not produced a workable design for you (but yet has been partially paid). I don't know what the legal protocol should be on that, though.

On the other hand, I can see the situation from the artist's perspective (not this artist in particular, but *any* artist) as well. Let's say an artist is hired to do some work, quotes a price based on what he is led to believe he is expected to do, and then in the middle of the project the person who is hiring him to do the artwork makes some wacky or above-and-beyond demands. The artist didn't sign up for such work, or perhaps the artist feels that they've already made enough adjustments/fulfilled their end of the bargain, and now the client wants *more* and *more*. In such a case, an artist might say, "That's it. I've done what I was paid to do, and it's clear that you'll never be happy, and that you expect more than what you're paying me to do. Goodbye."

In such a case, (in my opinion, as a non-lawyer) the artist should be able to bail out, and yes, they should be able to retain their copyright and the partial payment. The client can use the work they did, as-is, or not. Things just didn't work out, that's all. I have no idea whether such a scenario resembles what happened with you and this designer, though.

[qking]

Then if I were to contract a new designer am I able to have the designer create something similar to what the previous designer created. For example, if the homepage is a bookshelf with buttons as books on the shelf. Could I have the new designer create a similar bookshelf but different design. Would there be issues of using the design/idea? With my business being selling books.

[crescenta]

It is my understanding (speaking as a non-lawyer) that you can't copyright a general idea. However, if you were to show the new artist the previous artist's work, and request that they copy all or part of the previous work very closely (or paint over or work over parts of it), then I believe that would be a copyright violation. But just a general *idea*, like "Make a graphic with books used for web buttons"? I don't think that's any sort of violation. The closer it gets in appearance to the previous artist's work, though, the dodgier it might be, from a legal standpoint.