Re: Work for Hire and Copyright Assignment.

On Thu, 25 Mar 1999, Wendy Nemeroff <wendy_nemeroff[_at_]geoworks.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/3/99, Terry Carroll <carroll[_at_]tjc.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2 Feb 1999, Kaye Caldwell <kaye[_at_]ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > In California the work-for-hire might be sufficient since under
> > > California law it makes them an employee in which case the employer
> > > owns the copyright anyway.
> >
> > In California, a work-made-for-hire agreement does not make the hired
> > party an employee, except for purposes of assessing unemployment
> > insurance and worker's compensation contribution.
>
> Please enlighten me as to which case has this as its holding.

I'm not aware of any cases on point. The provisions are only in the California codes relating to unemployment insurance and worker's compensation. There is no authority to support the proposition that such a contract makes the hired party an employee for any other purpose.

-- 
Terry Carroll       | "Report of the Committee On Governmental Affairs,
Santa Clara, CA     | United States Senate, To Accompany S. 1364, An Act To
carroll[_at_]tjc.com     | Eliminate Unnecessary and Wasteful Federal Reports."
Modell delendus est |  - Title of U.S. Senate Report 105-187, May 11, 1998