Graphic design agreement "No Right To assign"

[candy_mmm]

Im working on a website for a new client.

i found a graphic design agreement  after the horrible problems of the guy who sent me checks that bounced.  So i used it on my second client who never had a problem.  Now I have a 3rd  client she phones me yesterday tells me she has no problem with the agreement EXCEPT

10.6 RIght to Assign.

Customer has no

Comments

[foutu]

by the way i get what you mean now, disregard my comment in the other post.

duh. you make a shape with the pen tool in photoshop, convert it to pixels so they can't mess with it. (and the attribution/contest right thing... gotcha)

[plexq]

I was about to make a reply challenging this, but I stopped, and went and checked my facts.

I have now come to the realization that I am the copyright holder of a bunch of stuff I thought I didn't own. This is awesome, because some of it is worth quite a bit of money.

[candy_mmm]

do share now:)

[yo_sarrian]

She can sell the website all she wants. It's the website DESIGN she can't sell. If she wants to sell the whole thing then you'll have to be involved. But assuming say one of her competitors buys her out, and just wants to get rid of the competition that has nothing to do with you or your design work other than your work will no longer be up on a live site.

[pobbly]

Here's my two cents on this and I haven't read the other comments. In my past experiences though, I've had places of business I've done design work for and then later they altered a design I had done. Brought in other vendors, etc...When I didn't have that term in the contract I had no grounds to call and say "hey, what are you doing? It looks bad now..." With that term in their, it gives me the right to call and say..."hey, did you need me to fix that because in our agreement terms you weren't to alter the design."

This of course means that all things need to be defined so that if they alter content within a design they can do so within the look and feel of your original piece.

It has generated a lot of extra, repetitive work for me because they know it needs to be approved by myself and so they'd rather just pay me to update elements and content within a design.

[swtcatastrphe]

I know this is a really old post, but I was wondering if you've ever had a client object to this (or another contract term)? I understand why this makes sense, but it seems like it would be difficult to explain/justify to the client that they can't do what they want to their own website.

[scryren]

Responding to a very old post but I figured I would share my experience on this topic