protecting .fla files from unauthorized use

[ss]

hi, i do websites for ad agencies as a sub-contractor, servicing clients on
their behalf using content they
create in house by art director/graphic designer. I usually send the site
to them zipped up or post to clients
server. Sometimes my clients try to ask me to give them my .fla files. Im
always strongly urged to never
ever release my editable documents or actionscripts to clients. Their
intention is to use my services then
cut me out of the job so they can continue editing my original files by
hiring someone else or doing it themselves.
These are not "work for hire" contracts. So, the client is trying to get
past paying the higher price for my .fla
files.. which is the common practice ive been following in my business.
The question is : Does anyone here know of documentation that spells out
common pricing guidelines and ethical practices relating to the issues
described above?

ie, the bigger question is, how do i protect myself from being abused by
clients who demand my fla files,
many clients assume that getting the files i make includes the fla files and
they get really bitchy when i
refuse to provide them. I would be really handy to have some reference
guidelines written by an authority
to act as documentation so these clients can stop harrassing me.. or at the
least, they should understand
when i tell them that the fla files are ALOT more money than the swf files,
due to the fact that they contain
code that is copyrighted and owned by the developer.

another clarification that is sticky: since much of the media provided to
me is not my property. so, an alternative
to giving away my flas could be to simply give them flas with all the code
stripped out and anything i have
designed or photographed seperated from the project in order to protect
myself from being seperated from
my rights and dollars.

if there are alternatives to these strategies, i would appreciate some
clues.. !!

peace & profit to all !

dd [email]dale@flashyboy.com[/email]

[Jeckyl]

Your contract with them should clearly indicate what they get and what they
don't. And you should ensure that they understand this, and the reasons
behind it. And that you make clear any additional charges for purchasing
source code (if any).

Then there is no question about it .. if they agreed to the contract, which
clearly stated what they receive, and they want any different, then you just
tell them no, and remind them about what they agreed to.

If you want an analogy, you could mention photographers, who give you the
finished photo's but keep the negatives and the retain the rights to make
copies (so if you want additional copies you go back to the photographer).
Or to builders, who construct a building for you, but don't have to supply
you with the full working drawings or with all the materials you require to
build your own house etc. Or if you go to a shop and order a meal, you
don't expect the chef to give you the details of the recipe, so you can make
the food yourself and not have to come back.
--
All the best,
Jeckyl

[Shane IRL]

LOL loved your analogies Jeckyl!! Especially the Chef! To be serious for one
moment, Jeckyl hits the nail on the head. Your (dale) client should be made
of aware of what is and what is not part of the contract before signing it!
Obviously the written contract should state this. Be firm, but polite if
your client questions your reasoning.

If you have personally created a piece of programming code within the Fla
file and your client will not accept NO for an answer, then your client
should pay you a licence fee for the use of that Fla file, renewable every
year. That's just another thought.

Regards

Shane IRL

"Jeckyl" <Jeckyl@Hyde.com> wrote in message
news:fcDGd.121056$K7.22788@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

> Your contract with them should clearly indicate what they get and what
> they don't. And you should ensure that they understand this, and the
> reasons behind it. And that you make clear any additional charges for
> purchasing source code (if any).
>
> Then there is no question about it .. if they agreed to the contract,
> which clearly stated what they receive, and they want any different, then
> you just tell them no, and remind them about what they agreed to.
>
> If you want an analogy, you could mention photographers, who give you the
> finished photo's but keep the negatives and the retain the rights to make
> copies (so if you want additional copies you go back to the photographer).
> Or to builders, who construct a building for you, but don't have to supply
> you with the full working drawings or with all the materials you require
> to build your own house etc. Or if you go to a shop and order a meal, you
> don't expect the chef to give you the details of the recipe, so you can
> make the food yourself and not have to come back.
> --
> All the best,
> Jeckyl
>

[ss]

hey guys, thanks for your supportive comments here ! i wanted to report
back to you (esp jeckyl) that the
metaphor about the chef helped me negotiate through what could have a very
huffy exchange between
me and my client ! I got myself in a tricky position by abandoning my
standard biz practices and allowing
my client to request and recieve work without adjustment to the contract. I
have renewed faith in previous
experiences that went well because of the properly understood agreements
that came at the first meeting about
projects... Shane, thanks also for the suggestion about renewable licensing
of code.. rock on !

peace.. dd

[Jeckyl]

Glad you've got it all worked out.

Go and treat yourself to a nice restaurant and celebrate with a good meal ..
but don't ask for the recipe :):)
--
All the best,
Jeckyl

[Shane IRL]

Your very welcome. I thought the Chef explanation was brilliant!! Glad you
got it all sorted mate.

--
Good luck
Shane

"ss" <dale@flashyboy.com> wrote in message
news:UcHHd.9592$Vx2.9554@trndny01...

> hey guys, thanks for your supportive comments here ! i wanted to report
> back to you (esp jeckyl) that the
> metaphor about the chef helped me negotiate through what could have a very
> huffy exchange between
> me and my client ! I got myself in a tricky position by abandoning my
> standard biz practices and allowing
> my client to request and recieve work without adjustment to the contract.
> I
> have renewed faith in previous
> experiences that went well because of the properly understood agreements
> that came at the first meeting about
> projects... Shane, thanks also for the suggestion about renewable
> licensing
> of code.. rock on !
>
> peace.. dd
>
>