Who owns the website? The creator or the company?

[ggormsen]

Hello,
I am taking over the hosting of a website that my friend has for his business. The designer that created the site is saying that he owns the files, and we cannot have them.
I am not really going to mess with him, so I am going old fashioned and copying source files and images straight off the website, then putting them together on my pc for upload on the server. Luckily, my friend used GoDaddy to get his URL, so I can transfer it.

I cannot think of any reason why he would claim ownership to the files, especially when he is a horrible host (the site is down from 12am to 5am every night for "scheduled maintenance" and he charges $30 a month), but it adds to why he sucks so bad.

So, in your opinion, who owns the files you create for your clients? You or the Client?

[sobeit]

Find the original contract and see what it says - if no contract, then most likely the creator/designer. As far as the pictures and graphics, again, if the contract does not say and they were not provided by your friend, then the designer owns them.

If you are coping the source code and the graphics without the legal right, you can get into legal problems because you would be a violation of copyright laws.

[ggormsen]

Originally Posted by sobeit

Find the original contract and see what it says - if no contract, then most likely the creator/designer. As far as the pictures and graphics, again, if the contract does not say and they were not provided by your friend, then the designer owns them.

If you are coping the source code and the graphics without the legal right, you can get into legal problems because you would be a violation of copyright laws.

Then what does the client pay for? My friend paid $500 to get his site built and then $150 to get it started (plus $30 monthly hosting fees)
That really doesn't sound fair. If I build a website for a client, the moment they pay me, the only thing I claim is the right to put it on my portfolio site.
Imagine if an artist sold a painting, then 2 years later he comes back and says "I want my painting back and no you can't have your money back."

[sobeit]

Originally Posted by ggormsen

Then what does the client pay for? My friend paid $500 to get his site built and then $150 to get it started (plus $30 monthly hosting fees)
That really doesn't sound fair. If I build a website for a client, the moment they pay me, the only thing I claim is the right to put it on my portfolio site.
Imagine if an artist sold a painting, then 2 years later he comes back and says "I want my painting back and no you can't have your money back."

however if you only rented the painting you have no control over it.

That is why you need a contract whenever you do a site to indicate who actually owns the content of the site - without it there could be legal issues beyond your control whether you think it is fair or not.

does the design company that did the site have a website? if so give the address.

see the following article http://www.ivanhoffman.com/website.html

[ggormsen]

Originally Posted by sobeit

however if you only rented the painting you have no control over it.

That is why you need a contract whenever you do a site to indicate who actually owns the content of the site - without it there could be legal issues beyond your control whether you think it is fair or not.

does the design company that did the site have a website? if so give the address.

It was freelance, like myself. I'll see if he has a website. Maybe I'll spend a few hours tonight and just build a site in Wordpress for him. At least if he gets sick of me, I will let him keep the site.

Ok, I just checked with my friend and he says that the guy doesn't have his site up, but it was http://danmarwebsolutions.com/
According to what my friend signed, he paid $150 for the design and $50 per page. It is implied that he bought the rights to the site, but not actually said.

I love learning, even when it does irritate me. I will just chalk it up to me being a good guy.

[dm01]

Unless otherwise indicated in a binding contract, common law has traditionally held that an employer or client hold the rights to physical or digital representations of documents, images, prototypes, products, etc. Depending on your specific local laws, the employer may also hold the intellectual property rights.

If he starts giving you trouble, consult legal advice in your state.

[Redcore]

I would think that both have equal rights - the employer can use the site but probably can't SELL it to other businesses.

In my contracts I own the right to the code and the employer can have the web site as a whole. So if I build a system that I want to sell, I can do so. I cannot, however, sell that web site I made for the company. (web apps are a whole different ball game - I always exclusively own the rights to the system). ALWAYS have a contract though!

But at the end of the day, that other designer is a real a-hole. Charging $30/month and 25% downtime is pretty damn disgusting...and then throwing such a fit when the customer wants to move the site...ugh. Gives us other guys a bad name!

[jamiemac2005]

It's all down to the contract really. And whether the business feels they payed you for the service or the product. This sort of thing is exactly why contracts HAVE to be put in place.

[calthephenom]

wow, lame