RE: FN-FORUM: Best Blog stuff?

date posted 19th January 2006 09:28

In this case (as a guess), I would say the software company would win. I've
based this on the assumption that the council didn't request software that
is critical to their income. If it had been a private company & the
software developers were selling the code on, then it would have been a
different story.

This of course depends on other factors, not least of which is whether the
judge has any understanding of software & source-code, or even if he knows
which planet he is on.

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL REMOVED] [EMAIL REMOVED] On Behalf Of Andy
Macnaughton-Jones
Sent: 19 January 2006 09:51
To: FN-FORUM / [EMAIL REMOVED]
Subject: RE: FN-FORUM: Best Blog stuff?


There was a case in the press a few months ago (probably on the
register) about a software firm contracted to write some software for a
council but I can't recall who was involved. That came down to the
opposite side - the council had not specifically been given copyright so
it rested with the software company who were then entirely at liberty to
sell the same product on.

(some specifics might be wrong, but that was the gist - if anyone has a
link ?)

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL REMOVED] [EMAIL REMOVED] On Behalf Of Lee
Fogarty
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 9:43 AM
To: Andy Macnaughton-Jones
Subject: RE: FN-FORUM: Best Blog stuff?


Ok, I apologise for the previous misleading statement.

This is how the law works (currently) in the UK.

When you create any form of works, the copyright automatically goes to
the creator & not the commissioner.

However, and this is the important bit - if there is no specific written
agreement, signed by both parties, the commissioner can take the case to
court and the judge may well deem the commissioner to be the beneficial
owner. All copyright will then be passed over. This is mainly to stop
copyright owners using logos that they were commissioned to create &
anything else that may go against the commissioners implied license, but
can also be used for any IP that the commissioner feels they own.

There are steps in place to bring the UK & Europe into line with the US,
where the work for hire law stands. This will mean that all works you
are paid to do are then owned by the commissioner. It might also mean
that the US comes into line with the rest of us & scraps it.

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL REMOVED] [EMAIL REMOVED] On Behalf Of Andy
Macnaughton-Jones
Sent: 19 January 2006 09:10
To: FN-FORUM / [EMAIL REMOVED]
Subject: RE: FN-FORUM: Best Blog stuff?


If you hire a photographer, the usual situation (unless specifically
stated) is that the copyright of the created works stays with them. So
in the case you've given, the copyright of the customised work would
rest with the programmer, no the hirer. If you are an employee then the
situation is different. But you're right that if you're using open
source software and then customising it, that the hirer needs to be told
what is and isn't theres. Same situation arises when you're using
non-O/S software and you're using a component that you've bought in -
you need to make sure that the terms of the licence for that component
are adhered to and that you make it known in your contract of sale (or
whatever) that it's not something that you've written.

The general thing which people need to understand is that "Open Source"
does not equal "Free" and that open source isn't just on non-Microsoft
platforms either.

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL REMOVED] [EMAIL REMOVED] On Behalf Of Lee
Fogarty
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 8:14 AM
To: Andy Macnaughton-Jones
Subject: RE: FN-FORUM: Best Blog stuff?


Not necessarily. When you are paid to code, you are a work for hire.
Therefore all IP goes to the person that is hiring you. If this person
isn't made aware that parts of the code aren't theirs & see it
elsewhere, they could decide to sue. In which case they would find out
that they can't sue because the code is open source. This then places
the coder in a difficult position as they can then be potentially sued
by the customer for deception. The open source copyright holder may
also decide to sue for breach of contract.

The way round it of course is to give the customer the option of open
source software or custom software. It is then their decision whether
they pay extra for their own work, and they are fully aware of which
parts of their site doesn't belong to them.

Granted, this isn't going to happen very often due to customer
ignorance, or just not being bothered. In 15 years, I have come across
this situation twice. In both cases, the customer dropped their actions
& opted for a paid solution.



-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL REMOVED] [EMAIL REMOVED] On Behalf Of Andy
Macnaughton-Jones
Sent: 19 January 2006 08:00
To: FN-FORUM / [EMAIL REMOVED]
Subject: RE: FN-FORUM: Best Blog stuff?


Erm, is this an open source thing;

"More importantly, when a customer pays you for work, they automatically
retain copyright of your work - unless a specific agreement is reached
beforehand. Do you make your customers aware of every piece of code
that you haven't written? "

As every other piece of copyright says it's the author who owns the work
unless specifically granted to the other party (unless you're an
employee)

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL REMOVED] [EMAIL REMOVED] On Behalf Of Lee
Fogarty
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 1:24 AM
To: Andy Macnaughton-Jones
Subject: RE: FN-FORUM: Best Blog stuff?


Well, thanks for insulting my intelligence.

Firstly, I have no problem with the nature of open source and free
software.
Which I have already stated.

Secondly, I don't claim to be a lawyer, but I DO happen to know a hell
of a lot about open source & their (many) varied licenses & the
implications of using them. The pros can & do outweigh the cons.

Thirdly, you are showing your own ignorance of the subject by putting
PHP & MySQL in the same category (license wise) as phpBB & other off the
shelf web packages. I can't believe you actually said ' What sort of
license these are released under is irrelevant.'

Maybe you should read the licenses? Assuming you actually put them onto
your customer's servers? Do you know the implications of one license
contradicting another? Do you know whether the license for one package
states that derivatives are copyright of the author, or whether it
remains open source? You could find yourself installing something you
believe to be open source, when it is actually copyrighted. Do you know
whether the use of one package restricts the use of another? Has the
original copyright owner got ownership of changes? Is he/she likely to
withdraw rights?

More importantly, when a customer pays you for work, they automatically
retain copyright of your work - unless a specific agreement is reached
beforehand. Do you make your customers aware of every piece of code
that you haven't written?


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL REMOVED] [EMAIL REMOVED] On Behalf Of Dom
Latter
Sent: 18 January 2006 20:24
To: FN-FORUM / [EMAIL REMOVED]
Subject: Re: FN-FORUM: Best Blog stuff?


On Wednesday 18 Jan 2006 10:07 am, Lee Fogarty wrote:



Some of your "issues" are to do with template-based / ready-rolled CMS
or blog packages. What sort of license these are released under is
irrelevant.

Other of your issues are to do with the nature of open-source and free
software - I'd suggest that you could learn a little more about how
these licences work. Or stop using PHP and MySQL!

Dom


--
Freelancers, contractors earn more with Prosperity4 Call 0870 870 4414
or visit www.prosperity4.com and benefit from Inland Revenue approved
expenses today.

To advertise here: http://www.freelancers.net/advertising.html


--
Freelancers, contractors earn more with Prosperity4 Call 0870 870 4414
or visit www.prosperity4.com and benefit from Inland Revenue approved
expenses today.

To advertise here: http://www.freelancers.net/advertising.html


--
Freelancers, contractors earn more with Prosperity4 Call 0870 870 4414
or visit www.prosperity4.com and benefit from Inland Revenue approved
expenses today.

To advertise here: http://www.freelancers.net/advertising.html


--
Freelancers, contractors earn more with Prosperity4 Call 0870 870 4414
or visit www.prosperity4.com and benefit from Inland Revenue approved
expenses today.

To advertise here: http://www.freelancers.net/advertising.html


--
Freelancers, contractors earn more with Prosperity4 Call 0870 870 4414
or visit www.prosperity4.com and benefit from Inland Revenue approved
expenses today.

To advertise here: http://www.freelancers.net/advertising.html


--
Freelancers, contractors earn more with Prosperity4
Call 0870 870 4414 or visit www.prosperity4.com
and benefit from Inland Revenue approved expenses today.

To advertise here: http://www.freelancers.net/advertising.html