|
|
Posted by rynato on 02/13/07 19:38
for what it's worth:
1) This woman is a horrible client. I would never work with her again
no matter what. Believe me I gritted my teeth and kept my mouth shut
quite often, when dealing with her insane demands. She has this habit
of coming to an agreement for A and then she demands B, C, and D too,
for free... then she gets bitchy that we are behind schedule.
2) She doesn't have any influence whereby she could hurt future
business by talking about me. On the other hand, there are ways I
could shoot her down and if she gets nasty(er) with me, I will.
3) I have no respect for her business sense or acumen. She's an idiot
and has no clue what she is doing, business-wise. Just a bored rich
housewife, basically.
I simply want to know how I would go about citing in a small claims
court, the difference between 'working materials' and the product for
which I was paid. Is it a legal principle? Is it common law? Is it in
the UCC? Or is it simply a way you can choose to read a contract?
I realize this happens often... sometimes it's a freelancer and the ad
agency client, and the client starts demanding the freelancer's
photoshop and fcp project files. The freelancer has to decide whether
to keep the client happy or politely but firmly refuse. But on what
principle is this right to keep working materials, based upon?
I suppose I could simply treat is a matter of parsing the contract
strictly, and say to the judge (should it come to that, and it looks
more and more like it will), "look I agreed to produce X for her.
There is nothing in this contract that states she has a right to, or
paid me for, the working materials we used to create this production."
Again, useful/constructive advice appreciated. I'm still not clear
about this.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|