Editing Work for hire (section)

==== Business owners and startups ====

In ''Woods v. Resnick'' (2010), the [[United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin|Western District of Wisconsin]] found that a business owner is neither an employee nor an independent contractor for copyright purposes. Since "an owner has an inherent right to control the business", the owner cannot be considered an agent, let alone an employee, so the work for hire doctrine does not apply to them.<ref name="startup-wfh"/><ref name="Woods v. Resnick">{{cite court |litigants=Woods v. Resnick |vol=725 |reporter=F. Supp. 2d |opinion=809 |pinpoint=23 |court=W.D. Wis. |date=2010 |url=https://casetext.com/case/woods-v-resnick-2 |quote=In contrast, as a co-owner of the company, Woods does not have an agency relationship with F I Source. Unlike an employee or independent contractor, an owner has an inherent right to control the business.}}</ref>

Where [[Startup company|startup technology companies]] are concerned, some courts have considered that the traditional factors for finding that an author is an "employee" can be less important than in more-established companies, for example if the employee works remotely and is not directly supervised, or if the employee is paid entirely in equity without benefits or tax withholding.<ref name="startup-wfh">{{cite web |url=http://apps.americanbar.org/buslaw/blt/content/2011/04/keepingcurrent-ip.shtml |title=The 'Work for Hire' Doctrine and Start-up Technology Companies |first=Elaine D. |last=Ziff |date=April 12, 2011 |access-date=March 9, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170705211828/http://apps.americanbar.org/buslaw/blt/content/2011/04/keepingcurrent-ip.shtml | archive-date=July 5, 2017}}</ref>