[plug] Intellectual Property (was Re: [plug] PHP)

[Bret Busby]

Christian wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 12:45:22PM +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
> 
> > Kind of, but not exactly.
> >
> > If a contractor does work for a client, to create an application to run
> > on a web server, to which the client has local access, an executable
> > file, which cannot be easily decoded back to the PHP source code, would,
> > amongst other things, ensure integrity of the application (by preventing
> > hack programmers from experimenting; "Ooh, wow. Look what I have found.
> > I wonder what happens if I change these lines to make it
> > prettier...Oops! it doesn't work anymore - call the developer, and tell
> > him that his application has a bug...") (apart from the contactor
> > preventing anyone else from working on their application, and thus,
> > ensuring that the contractor gets any required support and development
> > work on the application).
> 
> I'm not a lawyer but I understand that in the vast majority of
> circumstances if you do some work for a client then they will own the
> copyright to the work that you've done so they are entitled to the
> source code whether or not you try to hide it from them or not.  Trying
> to tie people in to you as the developer by witholding the source code
> sounds somewhat questionable ethically to me.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Christian.

The ownership of the intellectual property of the software, from what I
understand, depends on the terms of the contract, between the contractor
and the client. If it is not explicitly stated otherwise, then, the
client for whom the work is done, is the owner of the intellectual
property of the software. That means that the contractor cannot sell
copies of the software to other clients, even in modified forms, without
the explicit permission of the client, for whom the software is
developed, as the client, having paid for the development, owns the
product of the development, namely, the software, and, thence, the
intellectual property of the software.

Where a contract states that the contractor retains ownership of
intellectual property of software provided, apart from the issue of the
right (by that, I mean a right implied or explicitly stated in the
contract, not a general right) to exclusive support work and further
development work on the software, the very important issue of the
responsibility of the contractor, when the software is compromised, by
the client, or, another contractor working for the client, or, some
other such person modifying the software, is clearly defined.

I think it is notsomuch a question of ethics, as, to me, it seems
reasonable and logical, to exclude others from modifying software
developed by a particular contractor, thus making the contractor solely
responsible for any defects in the software found after the software is
formally accepted by the client, but a question, as might be raised on a
mailing list such as this, where open source software is involved, as to
whether, in the context of open source software, it is an appropriate
policy. That was a question that was raised, when I raised the question
of whether the source code could be hidden, previously.

Disclaimer:
The above, is stated as my opinion, based on my experience, and, advice
of others, and, in reading materials on the issues of Duty of Fidelity
and Intellectual Property. I am not a qualified lawyer, nor, a qualified
practitioner in the area of law known as Intellectual Property, nor do I
purport to be either of these. I do not purport the above to be absolute
truths, but instead, to be my understanding, of applicable rights and
obligations. I assume no responsibility for any person acting on this
information, and any person taking any actions, based on the above
information, so does at their own risk.

-- 

Bret Busby

......................................