I have a standard term in my contract that says my client owns the work I do for him.

I have received an unusual query from a client who says he doesn’t want to own it until he has paid for it. I don’t see an advantage to changing the standard terminology. I think this is covered because if I do the work and he doesn’t pay me, he’s broken the contract and we no longer have a deal. It’s not like I can sell his web site to someone else.

I haven’t answered him yet.

I don’t think he’s trying to rip me off, I think he’s “over-thinking” it. But I’m no lawyer. Does anyone else have experience with this?

What’s the thinking behind his not wanting to own it until he pays for it?  Is there a legal or liability issue that I’m not thinking of?

I’m not aware of any, that’s what I was wondering whether anyone else on the forum had an opinion about.

I think that he thinks I should withhold it contractually to ensure payment, though I doubt he plans to cheat me. My “retaining the copyright” is not any kind of defense against that, anyway.

Anyway I sent a reply, so we’ll see what he says.

It turns out my client had misunderstood the contract phrasing, and thought I was trying to retain the rights for myself. Yeah, that would explain it.  ;-)