How much to charge client for project files?

[shelleyp82438848]

Have a client that wants all Premier and AE project files for a job we are doing for them.  They want to take the files and edit in-house should anything need to be changed in the future.  How many out there charge for this?  How much?

[John T Smith]

Since you are being paid by the client, and unless your work contract specifically states otherwise, I think that the work files belong to the client

[shelleyp82438848]

It's complicated.  We are giving up all editing jobs with this client in the future by doing this.  Knowing up front is important to know. 

[John T Smith · Accepted solution]

I think you need to contact a lawyer to read your work contract, to advise you on what the client owns

[SJRiegel]

Most designers I have had this discussion with are of the opinion that what the client is paying for is the finished project only, and that they do not have any rights to the work files unless it was written into the original contract. 

When the work files are handed over, there is a hefty additional fee, as a lot of your process is revealed there (you are handing over the recipe, not just the product), and in addition, they can pull the work files apart and use them make something that you would never want your name on. 

There is also the complication of things like fonts and stock photos. Fonts cannot be handed over, and stock photos are generally licensed for the one use, and cannot be handed over to be used in other projects.

[shelleyp82438848]

Thank you...all good points!

[joel_clements]

Copyright law is clear on who own's the files. By default it is the creator – UNLESS the contract specifically indicates transfer of copyright to the client upon completion of the project.

Imagine if customers started demanding all the CAD files for their newly purchased car? Or how about all of the raw recordings and tracks for the latest album by Justin Bieber? The same protections for intellectual property that exist for automotive designers and musicians exist for graphic designers, using the exact same principles.

[Nancy OShea]

There's nothing complicated about this.  The client pays you for your services.   If they want the project files, you  cannot hold back files for ransom.  

[georgei44616551]

This is inaccurate. They Typically pay you to produce a brochure or flyer - with the deliverables being A print-ready PDF. Not all the tools you used to make it. If it's a requirement it should be known upfront and part of the deliverables.

[rose ellenc70648925]

Actually, legally, the artwork belongs to the agency, not the client. They own the right to reproduce it in the same way that a commissioned editorial illustrator owns the original and those who paid for the commission have the right to reproduce it a limited amount of times, according to the agreement.

So, there should be an extra fee for the original files if the client wants them.

[joel_clements]

Imagine if customers started demanding all the CAD files for their newly purchased car? Or how about all of the raw recordings and tracks for the latest album by Justin Bieber? The same protections for intellectual property that exist for automotive designers and musicians exist for graphic designers, using the exact same principles.

[jl8270336]

You are absolutely wrong about that, and it is clear you do not work in the industry. You have no case.

[Abambo]

You are absolutely wrong about that, and it is clear you do not work in the industry. You have no case.

By @jl8270336

To whom did you respond?

[Carlos Ziade]

suppose you are shooting a wedding, the same rules apply, all photos and video rushes, edited and non-edited,

belong to the bride and groom since they pay you for your services ...

[kristopher wile]

Actually, this is not true at all, especially when it comes to photography. When someone hires a photographer, whether for a wedding or any other use, the photographer retains the copyright to their photos and the client receives a license to the number of photos specified in their contract. This license could be for worldwide use in perpetuity if the photographer allows, but the photographer still owns the copyright and retains full control over all unedited photos unless explicitly stated in the contract. This is standard practice in the professional photography industry and goes back to when photographers controlled the negative and made money on prints. This is why it is critical to explicitly state in the contract what the client is getting for their money because there is a lot of misunderstanding and misinformation out there regarding this. Video has a different set of standards since it's more collaborative in nature and most camera operators sign work-for-hire agreements transferring the copyright to the production company. But if said agreement has not been signed (or money has not been paid), then technically speaking, the same copyright rules apply to the camera operator's footage as well.

[gerryg83w]

That idea of the photographer's owership of the negatives (which the client pays for) raises a sore point for me. Our wedding photographer closed his business, without notifying his clients. There are several prints I want to replace, but the business can't be contacted, so I guess negatives are gone. We should at least have been given the option of buying them. I think what happened was legally and ethically wrong. I will send the files or negatives to my clients instead of tossing them when I quit my business.

[Ussnorway]

the client normally pays for prints not the negative and even if the photographer sends negatives [which many do] they still own the copy unless a contract states otherwise

as for tossing them in the bin, that sounds like something a company does not individual photographers

[gerryg83w]

The cost of the negatives is included in the total cost, no matter what the photographer charges. He doesn't get them for free. The studio was a small business, I think 3 photographers, who eventually just closed shop. I would have paid for the negs if I had known they were closing shop, but how could I have know because there was no announcement to former customers. They didn't thnk it was worth the trouble. I ended up scanning the old prints, imaging them in Photoshop and making new prints.

[Carlos Ziade]

but for the project files, a good idea is to specify in a contract that they cannot use

them in other projects for other clients that they charge especially if you have done

lot of creative work that you own full copyrights for ... they cannot resell your project this way

[shelleyp82438848]

Thank you...you make a very good point.  I didn't think of that

[Carlos Ziade]

you are welcome Shelley ! anytime

[Ussnorway]

it's common sense to keep a copy of the files for backup but yes in most scenario the client owns the working out files

[SJRiegel]

From a legal standpoint, the client does not own the working files, though the designer may choose to give them. 

From an AIGA article on the subject:

Ultimately, the choice belongs to the designer as to whether or not she will part with the valuable source files created during a project. Designers begin with a fairly strong legal position in a source file dispute, but this position would do well to be tempered with attention to your relationship with the client and with your overall approach to business. And lastly, your best friends in this issue are upfront, frank discussion with your client and a well-written contract.

Does A Designer Have to Turn Over Source Files When A Client Asks For Them? | AIGA Los Angeles

[Ussnorway]

does this client live in Los Angeles then?

[shelleyp82438848]

No they don't