Client wants .ai file of labels - but then uses them to make their own.

[katiet82588328]

Hi Designers,

I have a question for you. I make lots of logos and labels for products - in the past I usually send off an .ai file for them when its finished so they can print and make any last copy changes. However, I notice they are using those files to re-create other labels without my permission. I have, after all, sent them the layered files but am not happy they are knocking my work off for other labels.

So what do you do when your clients ask for the .ai file after they pay you? Do you just send them pdfs? Do you password protect them? I don't my work to be scammed anymore but not sure what to do.

Thanks!

[Disposition_Dev]

I think the correct answer is to talk to the client up front about it. If you don't want them using the artwork you created beyond just printing it, tell them that from the get go.. however, be forewarned. they are going to go to someone else.

my personal opinion is that you did the work to create x number of labels, and you were paid for that work. if they use that file to create more stuff later, you're not doing more work, so i don't think you should have any problem with that.

imagine someone paid you to build them a car. and then they had the audacity to drive that car back and forth to work without paying you per mile... or if someone asked you to design a single flyer, then they went and made a bunch of photocopies..

anyway. just my opinion. like i said, just talk to the client up front so they know what the expectation is.

[katiet82588328]

Thanks for your reply - the thing is they are not just making "copies" of the labels, they are using the structure/design and changing colors/words and logos to create brand new (terrible-looking) labels for other similar products without hiring me to make the changes or new labels.

Once they don't like how it looks from all their terrible changes, they'll hire me to make another one - and then the cycle repeats. I read some designers do not give out their .ai files. They are ruining my designs because they don't have the correct fonts and try to make changes.

Does that make sense?

[Disposition_Dev]

yea i understand the issue. what i mean is that unless you agreed ahead of time that they only have print privileges and they are not allowed to use the file for anything else, then i think they have every right in the world to use the file however they want. once they pay and you deliver the artwork to them, they own the artwork unless otherwise explicitly agreed.

perhaps a better analogy is hiring a contractor to build an addition on your house. then when it's complete, you decide you want to repaint the walls and add a few more electrical outlets.

you own the addition on your house, so you can alter it however you want. you shouldn't have to go back to that contractor any time you would like to use it or change it.

[katiet82588328]

Yes that makes sense. I just don't like seeing my work get butchered by people who "think" they're designers just because they own illustrator.

Last week they asked for a new label and wanted it done in a day and half, I told them unless they wanted to pay extra for that they'd have to wait until next week. They went behind my back and shared a picture of one of my other labels to another "cheaper" designer and had them re-create a new label from it. and by re-create, that designer completely copied my work but did a terrible job. Without my permission, nor had they paid me for that label yet.

I am just tired of people taking advantage of design files.

[Disposition_Dev]

understandable. but ultimately if you're not signing the labels in some way that someone could trace the artwork back to you, you shouldn't worry about a hit to your reputation. and your portfolio need only contain what you want it to.

i apologize if i sound harsh. believe me i know what you're going through, though not with artwork. I'm a full time developer and i mostly write software for manipulating illustrator. and i've written code for clients only to have them turn around and use it to build out their own stuff based on my underlying logic. it feels like you're getting cheated. but i guess ultimately you've just gotta think about it as getting paid for your labor and not for your product.

[michelew83603738]

You should protect yourself in your contract and the licensing rights within that contract. AIGA has some good guidance on contracts or you might want to hire an attorney to write one.

https://www.aiga.org/standard-agreement/

[SJRiegel]

williamadowling  wrote

yea i understand the issue. what i mean is that unless you agreed ahead of time that they only have print privileges and they are not allowed to use the file for anything else, then i think they have every right in the world to use the file however they want. once they pay and you deliver the artwork to them, they own the artwork unless otherwise explicitly agreed.

perhaps a better analogy is hiring a contractor to build an addition on your house. then when it's complete, you decide you want to repaint the walls and add a few more electrical outlets.

you own the addition on your house, so you can alter it however you want. you shouldn't have to go back to that contractor any time you would like to use it or change it.

Except that with design work, none of this is legally true (at least, not in the US). You are paid to create a particular label for print; what you are selling them is the rights to print that particular label. If they want rights to a label template, the cost goes up. 

As to your other commit - designers absolutely are getting paid for the product, it's not just hours, it's skill and understanding. 

No client has automatic rights to the layered file, just like if you buy a cake your are not automatically entitled to have the recipe as well.

[Disposition_Dev]

you may be right. and it may be possible to track down a client and compel them to pay for the template they used.

but somehow i'm guessing that the costs of doing so would be incredibly prohibitive.. do you really think someone is going to pay thousands or tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees to protect a template for a $500-1000 design job?

if you look back at what i originally said, my main point is that the designer and client need to be on the same page before the project begins. that's all.

[SJRiegel]

The original question was about how to protect work in the future, not about fixing what has already happened.

A few steps to help with that

1) provide only a press pdf

2) have a contract in place that specifies that the client may not re-use the files for other projects

3) include a certain number of last-minute copy changes in your price so they will feel more comfortable about not having the native files

[pedley_s]

I think you'd need a password protected press ready PDF? Saving as a PDF doesn't mean the file can't be opened and edited.

[Monika Gause]

pedley_s  schrieb

I think you'd need a password protected press ready PDF? Saving as a PDF doesn't mean the file can't be opened and edited.

Doesn't work.

A password "protected" PDF can be hacked by anyone who is able to use Google.

A password "protected" PDF won't be accepted by printing companies.

[michelew83603738]

Actually, lots of designers pay attorneys for a standard document that they can use with their clients that will protect their rights. It doesn't cost tens of thousands of dollars and if you spend a few hundred dollars to get a document that you can use for 5 - 10 years to protect you rights, I call it a good business decision. But AIGA also has a good document to pull from. If you have a client sign a good contract, they understand their rights and yours from the onset and they are far less likely to infringe on your rights, because it has been discussed and agreed upon in the first place. Not to say it won't happen, but less likely to happen, because they know they are open to liability.

[Jeff Witchel, ACI]

I agree with michelew83603738 entirely. Freelancers need contracts to protect themselves. A contract allows you to make sure that there are no misunderstandings about what is expected from both the client and the you, the designer.

Here's a great video about contracts: F*ck you. Pay me. - YouTube

While the title may be a turnoff for some people, the information is great!

[michelew83603738]

This is great Jeff Witchel, ACI​  I haven't seen this before. Definitely worth a watch for every designer or creative!

[Jeff Witchel, ACI]

There's a better version of this video on YouTube, but I could not post it here because of the curse word in the title. (It got flagged as inappropriate!) If you do a Google search for the uncensored version of the title, you'll find it. It's the same presentation, but more professionally shot .

[jane-e]

I wish I had seen this 10 years ago, Jeff!

[JETalmage]

...the designer and client need to be on the same page before the project begins. that's all.

Correct. If you're conducting business, do it in a business like manner. If you want happy customers, you need to make clear up-front what they're buying.

I'm as infuriated by blatant copyright infringement as anyone. (Particularly when I see a supposed fellow creative commit it.)

But a designer also needs to be practical and realistic about the quality and intrinsic value of what he produces. Everyone thinks his own design work is utterly brilliant and everyone else's is trash. But face it; the vast majority of graphic design (as opposed to illustration) is a rehash of something the designer has seen before; a mimicking of whatever is "trendy" at the moment.

One also needs to consider the practical needs of the paying customer.

For the most obvious example, a client needs full usage rights to a properly built identity package (logo and supportive graphic elements) he has paid good money for. And that's key; your work should be priced accordingly, and one of the criteria for that is the extent of usage rights. Again, it needs to be spelled out up-front.

But the same practicality principle often applies to lesser projects, too. Paying customers do business in an increasingly data-driven world (and conventional-wisdom graphics software has a lot of catching up to do in that regard).

I actually love it when a client wants to be able to reprint as-needed without having to come back to me for every little edit. Clients commonly think it's downright silly to have to, and depending on the nature of the project, I quite agree. I've often upsold a client from just a one-off set of designs to a solution which frees him from dependency upon me and empowers him. And that never lost me business; it kept the appreciative client coming back.

Projects like business packages (stationery, envelopes, business cards, etc.), product labels, restaurant menus, certificates, name tags, and more, often need to be delivered in an editable form that can be updated as employees come and go and recipes and prices change. Solutions for such things can be as simple as leveraging the functionality of enabled form fields in the print-ready PDF.

At the other end  of the client-editability scale are full-blown data-driven, network shared solutions. I've designed data-driven solutions for 1000 page product catalogs that are continually updated by non-designer data-entry clerks and that assemble themselves via scripts with no manual "desktop publishing" whatsoever. I've built data-driven marketing solutions to empower a whole dealership network to populate their own localized fliers, placement ads, mailers, and emails on-the-fly, without corrupting the centralized branding, thereby protecting the brand against the cheezy amateurish home-grown stuff that proliferated beforehand (and that you allude to).

So give some thought to intentionally providing editable solutions to your customers who need it. It may surprise you when you see that it keeps them (and their referrals) coming back to you.

JET

[Monika Gause]

JETalmage  schrieb

For the most obvious example, a client needs full usage rights to a properly built identity package (logo and supportive graphic elements) he has paid good money for. And that's key; your work should be priced accordingly, and one of the criteria for that is the extent of usage rights. Again, it needs to be spelled out up-front.

Talking about "spelled out up-front": if the client plans to use the artwork on different material, for different purposes, then *they* need to spell that out up-front, so the designer can some up with a solution that enables the client to do exactly that. For sure this requires extra thinking and will be more expensive. Asking for editable files afterwards is definitely not the way to go.

Of course the designer should ask the client if they plan to re-use the logo for different purposes before submitting a quote.

As for the catalog, restaurant menus, certificates, labels: yes, I prefer to have the client do the updates of this. But you can't compare developing a data-driven solution to designing a logo. It might be the same person doing that job (although I even doubt that in most cases), but it's a completely different skillset, different type of work and different kind of approach that is needed for making them.

[jdanek]

"So what do you do when your clients ask for the .ai file after they pay you? Do you just send them pdfs? Do you password protect them? I don't my work to be scammed anymore but not sure what to do."

Your situation is actually pretty common, mainly because copyright infringement law is never taught.  You were paid to design and "produce" a print ready file.  You were not paid for the file itself. Period.  Never surrender your work product.

[jdanek]

Check out...

www.gag.org

...the Graphic Artist Guild has a great reference book titled: "Pricing & Ethical Guidelines".  I recommend it for any designer.  Your work is considered "intellectual property" ad, because you are working as an outside designer ( presumably not a work-for-hire artist ), everything you do is protected by US Copyright Law.  You should consider drafting a contract stipulating usage rights.  I would also recommend when drafting an estimate, you include brief usage rights to any new project(s).  Many people believe that because they paid you they are entitled to the work files.  Not true.  If you plan on not doing any future work for the client, you can sue them for copyright infringement.  However, without a contract it is very difficult to win in court.  If you can, you are encouraged to apply for copyright ownership of the files in the US Copyright office in Washington, DC. Especially if the files contain proprietory information and original artwork such as logo designs. Then, should infringement occur, you have some level of protection.  You should also be given first opportunity for any derivatives that arise from your original designs.  Absolutely no copies and no PDFs should be in the client's possession.  You can request all of the files be returned ASAP.  Any future derivatives are protected under the original copyright.  Many artists simply are not aware of the protections under the law.