Legal Question in Intellectual Property in California

Copyright Question

An employee did some art work for a bridal show last year. She did the work after hours. I paid her for her work and used the art for the bridal show. I let her go a couple of months later. When the bridal show came up this year I used the same artwork. She called me and told me I didn't own the artwork and that I infringed on her copyright. I reminder her that she told me (last year) that I owned the picture. I paid her for it and I wasn't clear why it was OK to use the picture last year and it's not this year. She said she had given me permission to use it last year but not this year. That I had paid her to do the picture but that I didn't own it. Since I let her go she is not happy with me. I was way over staffed and let two part time designers go. One of which was her. I want to be fair and this is weighing heavily on my mind. I have a receipt for the work and the cd she gave me with the artwork. She has her name on the side of the flower in the picture and she says that is her copyright. Thanks in advance for your help.


Asked on 1/28/07, 1:49 pm

3 Answers from Attorneys

Elizabeth waiguchu Elizabeth Waiguchu, Patent Attorney & Attorney at law

Re: Copyright Question

The issue here depends on the the relationship between the two parties. The creator of the work is not necessary the owner of the work. It sounds more like work for hire and hence the employer would have a valid argument. Did you have any written agreement about the work?

Read more
Answered on 2/02/07, 10:41 am
Steven Mark Steven Paul Mark, Attorney at Law

Re: Copyright Question

With apologies to the previous responder, I disagree. If the employee did the work within the scope of her employment, you own it, not her. Check the US Copyright Law scn 201(b) as this is a work for hire. A work for hire is defined in scn 101.

Read more
Answered on 1/29/07, 11:37 pm
Timothy J. Walton Internet Attorney

Re: Copyright Question

Copyright is owned by the artist. If there was an understanding that one payment would license use forever, then she should not continue to bill. If the parties believed that it would be for one time use, then you should not have used it without permission.

Read more
Answered on 1/29/07, 12:51 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Intellectual Property questions and answers in California