[Wp Client Pro Nulled Graphicsl
Rancul Ratha
I know copywriters traditionally tend to get a per-piece royalty on each printed piece. Usually a small number such as 0.01-0.05 per printed piece (which can add up). So if a piece is reprinted, the copywriter is eligible for those royalties again. I'm also aware, that in today's world, even copywriters may be struggling to validate these royalties to clients unfamiliar with the traditional structure.
But.. designers really can't gain clients with any sort of "royalty". Merely using the word "royalty" in client conversations can ensure you do not gain the work, especially on something such as direct mail. At least that's been my experience.
I would, of course, disclose such fees prior to any work starting during contract negotiations. I am not considering some specific project after it has been created. I'm just presenting a broad, general, scenario here.
Anyone with any experience regarding this? Are there any recommended phrasing/arguments to persuade clients? Is there a solid basis for my thoughts on attempting to implement such a thing? Am I merely nuts and it'll never work?
Of note: I am not thinking of this as an all encompassing "blanket" policy for everything I create. Certainly a client should never be charged by the designer for reprinting their business card, or stationary in general. As well as many items seen as necessary "to do business" such as general promotional items. Unless the designer is also subcontracting printing services. However, these items are typically much, much, smaller in terms of cost to print than what I'm considering.
As an off-the-cuff example... a sales letter designed to get buyers to purchase lots of land. When that letter gets a response resulting in a purchase of land, the return the client sees is a direct result of the designer's work. Wether that work was performed last month, last year, or last decade. If I were a salesman selling the land, I'd get a commission - I'm seeing a reprint fee as more of a small commission without any direct tie, in terms of dollars, to the revenue the sales piece may generate.
Even if your design is so amazing and delivers a precise selling point, the client puts in internal resources into any kind of marketing effort. It is their employees who are burning time and getting paid for the campaign to work. That means phone calls, upfront payments, deliveries, distribution, taking the boxes from the car and moving them with the elevator, all of that back and forth which is done by them, not you.
Unless there was a specific agreement at the beginning of the contract for you to get paid reprint royalties, or provide limited usage, or be given shares in the company (which some companies actually do offer to their designers) I'm afraid they probably own what they pay for, with unlimited usage.
This sounds like a significant contract overall, so instead of focusing on recurring royalties for a specific item, which could be a sensitive, one-time only discussion, better focus on getting your overall rates higher with them, or be awarded some shares in the company if your work is that critical to their workflow (I've actually managed that with one of my clients and working on the second, similar situation).
With typical contracts, I don't think graphic designers have any chance to get any "reprint fee". In most cases, the resulted print-ready file is the Client's property, and the Client decides what to do with their own asset. It also looks unfair to the client from this point of view.
No. It may damage your reputation if you have not covered this by the contract.My advice to you is to pitch that client for a new project or an update. The time is running, and re-using the material maybe not the best practice for the audience or market?
On several occasions, I have included the original artworks (illustrations and photos) without transferring the copyright. The Client always was well informed.This helps to negotiate with the Сlient about the reuse of the artworks for the other projects. Also, get the client to come back to update the materials.To do this, you need to treat the project as several different tasks before starting work. And explain everything to the Client.
Definitely, you are not merely nuts. Seems you few steps from creating the studio or an agency. Run a direct mail as the service. And charge for re-prints whatever you want (and reasonable on your market).
I know Google image search is not a free-for-all to grab any image needed. However, many, many, many clients don't grasp this concept and often request or send images they'd like to use in a design or product which are clearly a violation of copyrights.
I recently had a client send an image to me which, frankly, seemed too well done and too specific for the client to be sending. My thought was, based on the clients business, it was doubtful they paid someone to create the illustration depicted in the image the sent.
So, I did a little reverse Google image searching and found the original, which actually won an award for illustration a few years ago. I immediately knew the image was a violation of copyrights and threw it away. I expressed the violation to the client only to be met with "Do a Google image search for 'XXX XXX XXX' and you'll see everyone is using it. Please use the image."
In some cases, clients are fully aware that they may be infringing. However, in their words... "The worse that can happen is we get a 'cease and desist' letter. We'll remove it then." My ethics cringe at this. How should this be approached?
I've never run into this exact problem but if a client sends me a logo from another company I email them back asking if they have written permission to use said logo in their marketing. If they say yes then that is sufficient for me. To word it nicely I go with something along the lines of:
I see you'd like Acme Co.'s logo included in your artwork, do you have any sort of authorization from them to include it? Just as I wouldn't include your company's logo in someone else's artwork without checking with you first, I have to do the same for them.
I remember seeing this artwork back when it was published in such and such (or when it won such and such award). I'm not familiar with it being released under a royalty-free license though. Do you know the artist or something.
I'm sorry but I cannot knowingly help you commit copyright infringement. It goes against everything I stand for as a designer. If you can get permission to use it then I'm happy to proceed, or if you want to use a different image that is royalty-free.
In my contracts I have clauses to the effect of "Client promises that all artwork provided for Designer is owned by Client, or Client has permission from the owner to use it. If Client is sued for copyright violation, Client will state that it was not Designer's fault."
I would stonewall along the lines of Ryan's approach. "Other firms may be using [image]. I have no way of knowing if those other firms received permission from the artist. Without that signed permission, I legally cannot use it in your work. This is for my protection and for yours."
You should also have a clause in your contracts along the lines of "all artwork provided by the client shall be artwork the client has full rights to reproduce. Designer will not be responsible for any artwork that was provided by the client"
The client proposes to use an image, and it looks like he has not acquired the permission to use it. Ok, no problem, using an image involves handling the license, he did not yet do that, to it's part of your task:
It helps to be - or pretend to be - absolutely convinced handling the license is part of the overall task, very obviously. Ideally, you show the mind set that it is clearly a question of who handles the license, and not at all a question of whether it will be handled.
Even if the client finally insists that you use an image without a license, you should be in a good position for that discussion. He would need to explain why you should "not do your work correctly", and it is implied and obvious that he is requesting something that is wrong in some way.
In this conversation, you could, instead of accepting his insistence, clearly demand that he should provide the image himself - it's not the kind of work you offer to do for a client. Even if that is used only as a rhetorical element before finally accepting, it should get the message across even more clearly.
That said, the clause will offer little protection if you knowingly violate intellectual property. If you show negligence and try to point at your contract in court you're going to get nailed. Maybe not every time but it's not worth the risk.
Reminds me of one situation I had. I was working for the Dean's office, and the head of a new program wanted political images of U.S. presidents. The head of the department had earlier requested that the office pay for royalty-free images, and the request was denied.
I had earlier run through over a dozen public domain image galleries and pulled the best I could pull (from slim pickings) and made the best I could pull from there. But then the new department head said he had easily found royalty free images and he expected me to use them.
I explained, very simply, that "royalty free" means "lump sum payment", as opposed to royalties per usage, but it does mean "payment", not "gratis" or "no payment needed." He said OK, but could I please use some royalty free images? He said OK without revising his expectation that I use royalty free images without anyone at the school paying for them, and made it clear that I was still delegated to use "royalty free" images without the Dean's office or anyone else at the school paying for them.
In that case I was lucky. He was supposed to negotiate with me exclusively through my boss, and my boss understood perfectly that I had searched through public domain image banks and already kept all the best images that I could find, and that the royalty free images were on a lump sum payment model only, and none of the ones he wanted me to use were gratis.
795a8134c1