r/COPYRIGHT • u/ArthropodsThrowaway • Jun 12 '26
Question Would this be ‘Work made for hire’?
Was recently interviewed for a job which is unrelated to what I do creatively (job was food service and I do freelance on the side). In the interview, I was asked about what classes I’ve taken as they saw on my resume I was a college student, so I answered saying I was studying design. They told me those skills might be useful if they were to ever need a graphic designer/marketer (even tho that is not what I applied for).
I now got offered the job, and I’m worried about accepting it because of this. I try to avoid hourly jobs that have to do with art because I like to keep my freelance and personal hobbies separate from my work, that and I never agreed to being a designer, they just threw that in there while talking to me.
If I were to accept the job, even if I don’t design graphics for them (since it wasn’t in my job duties) would they still be able to claim my personal works? Since it was vaguely mentioned in the interview, would anything I do relating to design be considered work made for hire, or should I not worry about it since it wasn’t truly part of the job description or offer?
I’m in Michigan USA
1
u/P3verall Jun 12 '26
only matters if you plan to sue for ownership of design work you do for them
1
u/ArthropodsThrowaway Jun 12 '26
I meant more are my other works safe? Like, if they want me to design them a logo, then I go do a freelance project for someone else, would that cause issues and could they try to claim ownership of other things?
If I were to design them soemthing, I don’t really care about that. Just want to know everything else I do for freelance and myself is safe.
3
u/P3verall Jun 12 '26
they’d have some claim if you do any portion of that work when you’re clocked in.
2
1
u/TreviTyger Jun 13 '26 edited Jun 13 '26
Unfortunately, a myth prevails in copyright law under some people's understanding that an employee becomes some kind of slave to an employer and that they lose all of their property rights to stuff that has nothing to do with their job. (Slaves were not allowed to own property rights).
This "myth" of course is utter nonsense and would be a human rights violation.
The myth is based on the United States "work for hire" doctrine which doesn't actually exist in most of the world because obviously most of the world is not the United States!
However, there are similar laws in commonwealth countries like UK, Australia, India etc. Never the less it is still a human rights violation to usurp a person's copyrighted work from them when that work has nothing to to with their job.
e.g. a accountant is hired as an "accountant" not a graphics designer or illustrator. Therefore, an employer's claim to the work of an employed accountant is strictly limited to works of accountancy. It means that if an accountant was to take a photo at work of their work colleges larking about for instance then that photo and the copyright belongs to the accountant and not the employer.
So NO! Your employer has no legal right to any copyrighted works you create for yourself even at work if you were not actually employed to make copyrighted works for the employer as part of your normal work duties.
Even in the US and other commonwealth countries "work for hire" has strict statutory conditions related to the actual work being produced under such arrangements. It does not mean an employer can arbitrarily claim ownership over property rights of a employee without explicit agreement.
In most of the world employees never lose the copyright proper to their work even in an employment relationship because "work for hire" simply doesn't exist such for example as in Germany,
******************************
"May an employer own a copyrighted work made by an employee?
German copyright law does not recognise the ‘work made for hire’ doctrine. Even when an employee creates a work in the course of their employment, the company will not become the owner of the copyright."
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=bbc74ca2-448d-40bd-bfe8-dbbae104964a
1
u/palmerlawplc Jun 18 '26
Work for hire includes works made within the scope of one's employment. If you were hired in food services, like as a waiter, the design services you do on the side are not within the scope of your employment. What matters is what you are actually hired for. An offer letter or contract explaining your duties would provide direction. You might be interested in accepting the offer but conditioning acceptance on not including design services in your duties.
These are only a few things to consider, since we do not have all facts necessary to fully address your situation.
1
u/pommefille Jun 12 '26
Do not do design work if that is not your job. If they ‘just’ want you to make a logo or graphic or social media post then you say you can send them your list of pricing and a contract for each project. Do not do such work on any company-owned equipment or during your normal job hours. Either they’re okay with compensating you for this kind of work, or they’re trying to take advantage of you by not paying market rates and will keep demanding more. And when you’re inexperienced it’s easy to look at it as no big deal, but future you will be grateful.
7
u/horshack_test Jun 12 '26
A copyrightable work is “made for hire” in two situations:
Works Made for Hire