|
Not sufficient.
"The determination of whether an individual is an employee for the purposes of the work made for hire doctrine is determined under "the common law of agency." What this means is that courts will look at various factors to determine whether the individual is an employee, such as:
* the control exerted by the employer over the employee (i.e., the employee's schedule and the hiring of the employee's assistants);
* the control exerted by the employer over how and where the work is done;
* the supplying of equipment for the employee's use; and
* the payment of benefits and the withholding of taxes.
Although these factors are not exhaustive and can be difficult to analyze in close situations, it is clear that a work created within the scope of a regular, salaried employee's job is a work made for hire."
Unless that statement was signed, and in writing, it is not sufficient for a transfer of ownership (or exclusive rights).
That depends on the situation, but I agree that most such admin would have good grounds for claiming non-exclusive rights to usage of the work.
|