Re: Employee or contractor?

On Thu, 24 Jun 1999, Robert Cumbow <rcumbow[_at_]grahamdunn.com> wrote:
>
> The importance of this for employment law is obvious; but its
> importance for copyright law should not be overlooked, since an
> "employee" who, within the scope of his employment, creates a
> copyrightable work for an employer creates a "work made for hire,"
> in which the copyright automatically goes to the employer; while a
> "contractor" who creates a copyrightable work for an employer retains
> ownership of the copyright in that work absent a written agreement to
> the contrary. -- Still one of the most widely misunderstood concepts
> in copyright law, and one on which those of us who are private
> practice lawyers need to keep our clients constantly informed.

I doubt that Congress intends to "federalized" the entire common law of agency. The copyright act relies upon common law interpretations of "employee" and "independent contractor" and probably will continue to do so unless the Act is amended. I think the article you cited mentioned the Internal Revenue Code and perhaps FLSA.

-- 

Rod Dixon
rod[_at_]cyberspaces.org
http://www.cyberspaces.org/