|
|
|
|
|
|
by rlucas
4313 days ago
|
|
|
Terrible, awful legal pseudo-advice about DMCA and "ownership." Do not fall for this, devs. There is a very strong chance that a payment dispute will legally be viewed as just that -- a matter to be solved by negotiation and perhaps a monetary judgment. The rest of the contract will all still stand, likely including any copyright assignment, work for hire, etc. Trying to DMCA someone who hasn't paid an invoice is a chump move that has a very real chance of winding you up with a bad faith or tortious interference response, or worse. A contract dev doing 25k worth of work should generally not be lawyering up, unless there's a major non cash component (eg equity in the project). If you don't trust the counterparts keep them on a tight leash for invoicing meaning get paid often and don't build up a receivable. But spending a thousand bucks on a lawyer and trying to get a company who probably actually does have "standard" paper and very good reason to want to stick with it, to customize their docs for your tiny one off deal is a rookie move and a waste of time and dough. The stuff you say about keeping an evidence chain of work and commits etc... That's spot on. But the reason it's spot on is that it's just good business. |
|
|
I've been in this business 25 years and I've been around the block many times with many clients. One thing I've learned over the years is that there is no standard paper. All contracts are written to protect the person or entity that wrote them. Don't kid yourself, if you blindly sign them just because they're "standard paper", you're the fool.
...As for not "lawyering up", just because you're a contract developer with "only" (for example) $25,000 in unpaid receivables... it seems to me that only someone looking to avoid paying their bills by unfair tactics would make such statements... someone who would definitely put their "standard paper" and lawyers in the way of making said payments.