It's a good video, but I think some people may miss the point.
You SHOULD be working with a good lawyer ahead of time. You should NOT be regularly suing your clients. Actually suing is expensive, time-consuming, and painful.
You should have a solid, enforceable contract set up ahead of time that you require new clients to sign, and get your lawyer involved if they want to change anything. The contract should ensure that you are within your rights to stop work and take away things they want if they aren't paying on time. If you do it right, you have a smooth and easy escalation path for non-payment, they're the ones who find themselves in a bad situation and have the option of either trying to sue you or just pay you the originally-agreed-upon amount.
I'm not a lawyer or your lawyer and don't even know what jurisdiction anyone is in, so don't do anything without consulting one. But the idea is something like, you only transfer control of servers and services to the customer upon being paid in full, no exceptions, and if they are behind on payment by some particular time and amount, you are explicitly within your rights to shut down services or block their access until such time as their account is paid up.
It's interesting how a good contract is kind of like a good program. The happy case is only like 20% of the work, the other 80% of the code or contract is all about detailing every possible way the happy case could go wrong and exactly what happens when each particular way of going wrong happens.
You SHOULD be working with a good lawyer ahead of time. You should NOT be regularly suing your clients. Actually suing is expensive, time-consuming, and painful.
You should have a solid, enforceable contract set up ahead of time that you require new clients to sign, and get your lawyer involved if they want to change anything. The contract should ensure that you are within your rights to stop work and take away things they want if they aren't paying on time. If you do it right, you have a smooth and easy escalation path for non-payment, they're the ones who find themselves in a bad situation and have the option of either trying to sue you or just pay you the originally-agreed-upon amount.
I'm not a lawyer or your lawyer and don't even know what jurisdiction anyone is in, so don't do anything without consulting one. But the idea is something like, you only transfer control of servers and services to the customer upon being paid in full, no exceptions, and if they are behind on payment by some particular time and amount, you are explicitly within your rights to shut down services or block their access until such time as their account is paid up.
It's interesting how a good contract is kind of like a good program. The happy case is only like 20% of the work, the other 80% of the code or contract is all about detailing every possible way the happy case could go wrong and exactly what happens when each particular way of going wrong happens.