Timeline for Hand over source code to customer
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 14, 2011 at 19:58 | comment | added | Martin Wickman | @George: He is 'freelance' | 'contracting' and he considers the other party "a customer" + there is nothing in his contract stating it is a "work for hire". I think this points very much towards the OP retaining the copyright to the source and product. I'm not disputing your "get-a-lawyer"-answer though, just trying to answer the OPs actual question. | |
| Jan 14, 2011 at 13:29 | comment | added | George Stocker | @MArtin Wickman: We don't know the relationship this person has. If it's a W4 Contract, it's akin to an employer-employee relationship; if it's a 1099, it's something different. And all of this only counts if the OP is doing business in the United States. At this point, there are not enough facts to say whether or not this is a WFH, and to get the answer to that question, he'd have to consult a lawyer. | |
| Jan 14, 2011 at 13:26 | history | edited | George Stocker | CC BY-SA 2.5 | added 210 characters in body; added 74 characters in body |
| Jan 14, 2011 at 8:31 | comment | added | Martin Wickman | @George. Quoting that document: "a mutual agreement that a work is a work for hire is not enough [to make it a WFH]". The work must also be in any of the other nine categories, for instance part of a motion picture a translation or an atlas, which is it not. So I'd say that it would be impossible for a hired programmer to fall under the WFC-clause. A great text with example is here: developerdotstar.com/mag/articles/… | |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 20:57 | comment | added | George Stocker | @Martin Wickman added the link. | |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 20:56 | history | edited | George Stocker | CC BY-SA 2.5 | added 60 characters in body; edited body |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 20:26 | comment | added | Martin Wickman | @George: You really should add a url to some source which backs up your claim. It sounds weird having to give away the source if it's the software product they asked me to create. | |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 19:53 | comment | added | egil | And how should this affect the price of the work done? Alot of places people mention developer charging around $75-$150/hr for this kind of development - does this include the sources? | |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 17:07 | comment | added | Kate Gregory | @David I know it's a specific legal concept. In essence the OP is asking "is this work for hire?" though perhaps without knowing. You're right that the key to the question is establishing whether it's WFH or not in the absence of a contract. My comment was that the answer rather assumed it was WFH and then laid out the consequences of that. | |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 17:01 | comment | added | David Thornley | @Kate Gregory: No, "work-for-hire" is a specific legal concept in the US, and so the answer is not a tautology. The Wikipedia article (not to be confused with legal advice) may be worth reading. It says that a US employer-employee relationship is work-for-hire, but otherwise there are strict requirements and it needs to be explicit. Do not rely on this without consulting a lawyer. | |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 16:53 | comment | added | tekiegreg | Tend to agree with above, this needs to be spelled out in contract. Typically my agreements I'm generous with (and expect pay appropriately) and tell the customer "you own everything including source, you only leave me with a limited demo right to potential future clients and archival purposes". | |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 15:14 | comment | added | Cameron Skinner | @Bold: No, I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. However, in many jurisdictions the general case is that the purchaser of bespoke software owns the entire output (source, compiled code, graphics/art etc) unless there is something specifically in the contract that says otherwise. The OP has not specified which country he/she is in so it is impossible to give specific advice. The OP asked for "common practice": I have stated what I have experienced in my time working for a company that does bespoke development. | |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 15:11 | comment | added | Kate Gregory | Your answer is a tautology: "if this is a work-for-hire they own the code". You have only managed to reduce the question to "is this a work-for-hire?" which is not really any different from the original. Add more details showing how one could tell if one had (accidentally?) entered a work-for-hire situation. | |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 14:57 | comment | added | David Thornley | +1 for covering the possibilities, recommending being more careful with future contracts, recommending a lawyer, and not going beyond that. | |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 14:51 | comment | added | Display Name | @Cameron Skinner, are you a lawyer? is the legal advice that correlates with the law in Egil's country? ARE YOU SURE? adding to that, i would say that if you develop a web site you would give the code since hiding the code has no sense in it, this case is different , the code is rendered by compiler and is hidden to the user. in order to run the iPhone app you don't need the original code, as a full contradiction to web server program, as the code is transparent anyways. he can claim that he gave the code the the client payed for which is rendered code by a compiler that turned into iPhone app | |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 14:40 | comment | added | Cameron Skinner | @Bold: Generally, the person paying for bespoke software development owns the source code. No need for the hyperbole about owning his life. | |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 14:30 | comment | added | Display Name | they don't own the source code, at the same time you could claim they own his life and he is there slave forever. your claim is not valid. | |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 13:27 | history | answered | George Stocker | CC BY-SA 2.5 |