[consulting] Setting Up as an Independent Contractor

[Cameron Eagans]

But if you do host your clients' sites, don't try to be cheap about it (i.e.
don't stick them on some cheap GoDaddy hosting account...that's just cruel).
Go with a Mercury instance on AWS or a VPS with Linode or Slicehost.

Build the first year into your bill, and bill them for subsequent years
later. This way, you have a reason to stay in touch with them. Usually, when
I call up a client when their hosting due date is coming up, they'll say
something along the lines of "Hey, do you by any chance know how to do X and
X and X? I know a guy who's looking for somebody that can do that, and I'd
be glad to recommend you..."

Re contracts: Always always always have one. It doesn't even need to be
lawyer written. All you need to do is write out your conditions and terms
and have both parties sign it for it to be legally binding. The trouble
you'll get into is when you have ambiguity in your agreement ("Well, this
happened, so is this clause still in effect?").

I'm not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice.

-Cameron Eagans


On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 7:25 AM, Sam Cohen <sam at samcohen.com> wrote:

> I hope that all this talk about getting a lawyer (and the expense involved)
> doesn't discourage someone from becoming an independent contractor.
>
> While contracts are essential for multi-developer shops and big projects,
> if you're a one-person "shop" working on smaller sites, you can get very far
> without contracts drafted by lawyers.
>
> To start, make sure you receive payments in advance -- as much as possible
> -- and as you go.  Invoice frequently.  I suggest every two weeks.
>
> Be very clear with your client about how often you bill and when you expect
> to get paid.  If a check doesn't come in time, consider stopping all work
> until it does.
>
> If you can, host your clients sites, or set up the hosting account and
> include the cost it in your bill.  This way you have leverage if the client
> decides not to pay.
>
> Sam
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:24 AM, Luigi Bai <lpb at focalpoint.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dave,
>>
>> I know this will come across as nitpicking, but to be clear: releasing
>> code
>> under the GPL actually /requires/ you to retain ownership of the code. To
>> do
>> one you have to do the other. The GPL is a license to others of rights you
>> retain; if you don't retain those rights, you can't protect your code with
>> the GPL.
>>
>> And so it's clear it works the other way: you can also assign code, as a
>> work-for-hire, to your client, while contractually obligating them to
>> release
>> it back to you under the GPL.
>>
>> Finally, but probably not exhaustively, as others have mentioned, you can
>> write the code as a work-for-hire, where it's owned by the client and
>> never
>> released to anyone under any license.
>>
>> ITANAL
>> Luigi Bai
>>
>> On Monday, 29 March 2010, Dave Hall wrote:
>> > Disclaimer: IANAL
>> >
>> > > ----- "Sami Khan" <sami at etopian.net> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > I am sorry but when you work on Drupal, you should retain the rights
>> > > > to your code or it should be GPL,
>> >
>> > The 2 things are mutually exclusive.  You can retain ownership over code
>> > and release it as GPL.
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> consulting mailing list
>> consulting at drupal.org
>> http://lists.drupal.org/mailman/listinfo/consulting
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://samcohen.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> consulting mailing list
> consulting at drupal.org
> http://lists.drupal.org/mailman/listinfo/consulting
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/consulting/attachments/20100329/2736f22d/attachment.html