Client wants editable artwork....

You can't legally send him the fonts. Tell him that you would if you could, but you can't so you won't. ;)

what ivan said, it violates the license you agreed to (presuming you're legal :)).

beyond that, does your client pay for the editable files? i don't give those to the client without an agreement up front (in which i charge more initially) or if they pay additional when they ask for them later.

not to say there wouldn't be exceptions to that rule, but editable files are more valuable to both you and to the client. that value shouldn't just be given away without some consideration (even if that consideration is good will and your client understands that you're giving them additional value without incurring an additional charge). if you just give it away without acknowledging the additional value, you're devaluing your own work.

i dont know. i think if a client pays you for a design. they are entitled to everything you did to get there as well as the finished product itself.

in 15 years, ive had all of maybe 5 clients want source files. most wouldnt know what to do with them if they had them...

now the fonts. yes. they should have to buy those

What an interesting thread this is turned out to be.

My company typically quotes such a high price for the editable files that we rarely even need to worry about this. It is bad practice for designers to give clients editable files. I would be asking why the client wants the editable files in the first place.

I just ran into this issue this week. I argued that I provided a graphic design service, which was not taxable. I provided a pdf to the printer and the printer gives them the product of my service. This issue does have a lot of controversy! My question, "Doesn't the artist have creative ownership rights on any original artwork within the file"?

Because a lot of what I do are logos and files with minimal text... I always convert fonts to outlines and send away. This solves two issues... one being the font licenses, and the other being if they want to change anything in the future - they have to come back to me for more work.

I'm not about to complete a great project for a client and then allow them or their "budding" graphic artist to manipulate the files I send them into brand new products. Sure they can change colours, placement, etc... but they can't create brand new projects from the file I supply.

I'm not a professional designer but I do what I can. As an amateur I love getting the whole editable file, and have requested it from a designer that works with me on a non-profit. Since I cannot create graphics well, I can use the components to create other ones, thereby not taking up the designers time. I would fully accept the answer of "no". I always expect to buy the fonts myself.

However, for my personal business and when I've had web designs or graphics/logo created, I probably wouldn't even ask the designer for the layers. If I could create graphics that well I would not provide them. I wouldn't want my components used to make a schlocky design. Yuck.

What wgzn said... if a client wants to edit files, they can create their own artwork. Or, hire someone internally. They should only get finished files from a professional. I agree that they are paying for a finished product. Everything until that point is creative process. You don't get the die when you buy a cast iron pot.

So, if it's a business card and they have 30 employees then they should pay a premium for the .AI files with non-outlined fonts if they request?

Assuming the detail of supplying editable files was not predetermined in a contract, and that they are clients for whom you will no longer be doing work, then I would:

A) Supply the editable files in native format for a price over and above work to date. Include in those working files all sorts of peripheral flotsam and jetsam: stray paths, spot colours, hidden layers, corrupt fonts that are not relevant to the job, massive files adorned with filters that have nothing to do with the finished art but are part of the process nonetheless, corrupt jpegs embedded on hidden layers with 200 spot colours assigned to invisible stray points well outside the artboard... you get the drift.

B) Tell them to source the fonts for themselves.

In the future I would treat it the way I treat expendables on film & foto jobs. You buy the font for them, and charge them for it (with a small mark-up) in your invoice.

I think your true value as a designer comes from the quality of work you do, customer service you provide, and the attitude & flexibility you have during the project. Don't forget, you are simply a creative tool for the individual or business who hired you to perform this work. I think you get very negative responses when you claim the "you have to go through me for any changes" attitude. If you nickel and dime someone by requiring all changes to a business card to go through you, you're probably missing out on new, larger jobs because of it.

If they want the files, explain why you're reluctant up front. If they still want them, then oblige and provide them with good customer service. In the end, I think it will work out better for you.

Interesting thread - thanks for all the varied opinions on a complicated subject.

Fonts: It's illegal to hand them over - so don't. Either turn them to outlines or explain to them you can't hand the fonts over because it's illegal. Let them decide if you can't.

FIles. Tough one. I'm more or less with wgzn on this one. Multiple use files are very rare and clients who are looking to save a few bucks by going to a cheaper designer are probably not worth keeping anyway. There's also the obvious point that cheaper designers are usually not as talented, so it's a good bet those files come back to you anyway. How confident are you in YOUR skills? I'll stack mine up against any $20 an hour designer out there.

However... make sure their bill is paid in full, tack on a reasonable profit for backing up the files and creating a disk. As drew just said, nickel and diming clients is the surest way to send them to someone cheaper. That doesn't mean you have to give them everything used to create the file. I tell the clients on day 1 that "all the files used in the final piece" are backed up. That (generally) means flattened photoshop files and (usually flattened) illustrator files with outlined fonts. This is a practical matter anyway because it's virtually impossible to save every file.

It's important to recognize the signal you send when you try to be hard about it (or if you try to totally screw them over). The client might just want to be secure in the fact that if something happens to YOU - they still have access to THEIR work. They're MORE invested in the project than you - it's THEIR company for which the work is created. To you they're just another client out of many. You can help build trust and a successful relationship by being open about the situation. The reasonable clients will be reasonable and appreciate the fact you're being honest. The clients you don't want will take their files and leave. It's win-win imho.

After reading this thread, I am amazed at the general sentiment here. But I recognize it from my own projects where I employed a graphic designer.

I regularly hire graphic designers for large R&D projects, including logos, posters, presentation booth designs, website design, etc. I always ask for the original files. Unless there are expensive fonts involved, I usually get them too, and acquire the licenses for the use of stock photo's etc. Now why would a client want this? To profit from your hard work and leave you behind as a beggar? Well, no.

First and foremost, if you die tomorrow in a car crash, I'll cry a little. Until the realisation hits that my next deadline is looming. Then I thank my deity for the original files.

Second, yes, we have our own internal design team. And yes, maybe I'll let them do some mock-ups for some design changes. They're fast, in the same office, and at least for me as a project manager: free. I'll be able to better specify to you what I want for the final version (if I wasn't happy with your first work, I wouldn't bother with the original files. Iwould have just asked another designer to create something better. As such, I want a good working relationship with you)

Third, you might be an employee at a design firm. I love your work, but you don't love your boss. You leave, and I think the other people in their office are crap. See nr 1.

Finally, if I cannot get the original files for whatever reason, and you're trying to take advantage of this and/or give me crappy service, know that I can just give the design to someone else and have it recreated (with minor changes of course). Now that is when you'll lose my business, and that of the multinational I work for. And we can afford better lawyers.

That said, I have only sent one company away in my carreer. Most designers respect my points as much as I respect theirs (eg cases with special fonts, expensive licenses, derivative works, etc). And we all want to get along and get things done ;-)

i think we're debating two different points here.

first, i have zero problems giving the original files to the client. none whatsoever. i've done it many times (just finished putting together a DVD for a huge project with all original artwork on it this weekend).

so i'm not sure anyone should argue that the clients should never get the original artwork.

the point i was making in the beginning that started us down this track is that the original artwork has more value than flattened final production files. these files belong to the designer, by default (at least in US copyright law). but the reuse/repurposing value that they provide the client (and let's face it, that's the only reason the client would need the original working files) has a financial value, both to you and to the client.

for some things, the minimal reuse value to me (see: business cards) means i would likely create setup files for the client to use and in a way that they could easily edit the names and submit files to the printer. i personally don't want to put names into an already designed file, whether typing it or running a merge (i'm a designer, not an admin). but there's a little bit of value to the client in me setting up files for them to be able to do this themselves in the future. and i should charge them for that (even if it's just the hours spent setting the files up properly for their future use).

for other things? if i designed and built a structured layout for a complicated document, something i was able to do in a relatively (to a less experienced designer) time and with well-designed structure, handing my working files off to a client gives them significantly more value for future work using any of that design/structure i built. and personally, i want to be compensated for that. if a client is getting something with significant value from me, i think i should be getting significant compensation in return. i don't think that's unreasonable. and i think it's hard to argue that it has no value, because if it didn't, the client wouldn't want it. remember, you are in a contract situation here, not a "work for hire" situation, so they don't legally own your work product unless it's specifically stated in the contract (and when I do that, there's usually a cost for the client, even if it's just built into the number and not specifically stated). (previous statement based on US copyright law)

i understand where debeoulve is coming from, as far as relationships with companies vs their employees and fear of something happening to the designer (something bad or even them just losing contact somehow). but let's face it, this is a risk you take with any vendor, to some extent.

in the end, though, if you feel you need that piece of mind, it's still available to you. i just don't think it's necessarily something that you get for free just cuz you want piece of mind. not to say there's anything wrong with giving it to the client for free, but both you and your client should be cognizant of the fact that you're giving them something of value for free. and it should be done as a conscious effort, not just by default. because otherwise you're just selling yourself short as a designer.

my two cents worth.

As far as I'm concerned, once the project is finished, the client can have the original files if they request them (with the aforementioned exclusion of licensed fonts... yes, they should purchase the fonts themselves, or I can purchase a copy for them for a fee).

I mostly view this along the lines of things like logo designs. For the amount of money I would charge a client for a logo design, they should darn well be allowed the native files. If there's one thing I'd HATE to see is the logo I designed for someone reproduced poorly because they were forced to scan it to run it in a newspaper ad or something.

Speaking as a a person who develops a multitude of newspaper and online ads for a vast array of clients, I would much rather be able to have the client supply me the native file for their logo so I can easily place it in an ad for them instead of being forced to try and scan it cleanly or have to mask it out of some other design. I don't seek native files for logos so I can change and manipulate the logo... I'm a firm believer in branding and maintaining the integrity of a logo supplied to me. All I want is the darn logo so I can fit it into their ad design.

I think holding on to the native files with an iron fist out of paranoia of losing work from the client is not the right way to approach a relationship with the client. If you're skilled and pleasant to work with, the client will keep coming back. If they're the penny-pinching kind, then all the better they pay me for my time then take the original files and their skimpy behavior to someone else and be a headache for that person, instead.

Honestly, what's being discussed here sounds more like a leasing program for art than an outright purchase. Clients can lease the use of the art you've created, but if they want to "buy the farm", then they have to pay through the nose. And, if you want to go about it that way, that's perfectly fine, just be sure to be clear about it in your contract.

The question: Do you send editable artwork to the client including the fonts OR do you ask your clients to purchase the fonts separately.

The answer:

Do you send editable artwork to the client including the fonts --- If stated in the contract, YES. But... for me eps file only (all in one layer) not the ai file. (Why... that's for another topic.)

...you ask your clients to purchase the fonts separately --- If stated in the contract, YES, but if not definitely NO.

=============
Everybody has written too much already. Nice to hear comments from co-designers.