Re: Work for Hire and Copyright Assignment

From: Stephen Fishman <sfish55[_at_]yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 14:43:43 -0800 (PST)

On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Michael Leventhal <michael[_at_]wiredlaw.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/21/99, Stephen Fishman <sfish55[_at_]yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 17 Jan 1999, Barbara Gall <bgall[_at_]sah.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I seem to recall some case (Second Circuit, maybe?) which held
> > > that a copyright assignment contained in a work-for-hire agreement
> > > executed before the work was created was invalid. Help?
> >
> > I think the case you mean is Schiller & Schmidt, Inc.v. Nordisco
> > Corp., 969 F2d 410 (7th Cir. 1992).
>
> Does this mean that work for hire provisions with the standard fall
> back language (i.e. -- "in the event that this Agreement is
> determined not to be a work for hire, Contractor hereby assigns all
> rights, etc.") would not be a valid way of protecting against a
> determination that the work was not a work for hire? If so, how
> does one protect his or her client?

Oops. The case I cited here said that a work made for hire agreement entered into AFTER the work was created was invalid. I no of no case saying that WFH agreement executed before the work is created is invalid. Of course, if you're dealing with an independent contractor, the work must fall within one of the categories of works for which WFH is allowed.

Stephen Fishman
<sfish55[_at_]yahoo.com>

---

DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com/ Received on Sun Jan 24 1999 - 22:45:37 GMT