I do software development on contract basis. I was approached by someone for a software and they want to pay good but they want complete ownership of the code and software (they probably are going to resell it). what is the best approach here?
I need some legal advice
- Thread starter rashidme
- Start date
HedgehogPeter
Member
Wouldn't this be more common than not if you develop custom software for someone? What is the key concern for you? Your contract would state that the customer owes the product and the source code. If you want to use some of your existing libraries that you developed, you may want to exclude them from ownership, giving the customer a license to use and modify.
+1 for library exclusion. I will make a note of that. But can the contractor (I) put my logo on the software?
Riceburner
Well-known member
All depends on how you work out the contract. But generally, if someone is paying for something, they own it. Most companies have ownership of anything you do while under their employ or on they premises. I've written in exclusion to it before.
Seems to me you either do it, or you don't...no?
A similar situation perhaps - a lot of high end professional photographers like to retain the rights to the negatives (or in modern day, the high quality original digital files) so that they can continue to make money from you down the road if you want more copies, enlargements, etc. To buy the rights outright costs a lot more - IE, they get their money upfront. We bought our wedding photo negatives outright for this very reason.
So, long story short...maybe agree to their terms but tell them it'll cost them more for your services as a result.
But then again, knowing what I know about coding (I have a few friends who are career coders), it seems to be getting increasingly cutthroat - too many terms or restrictions on ones work and the contractor just moves onto someone else who will bend to their whims and desires instead.
A similar situation perhaps - a lot of high end professional photographers like to retain the rights to the negatives (or in modern day, the high quality original digital files) so that they can continue to make money from you down the road if you want more copies, enlargements, etc. To buy the rights outright costs a lot more - IE, they get their money upfront. We bought our wedding photo negatives outright for this very reason.
So, long story short...maybe agree to their terms but tell them it'll cost them more for your services as a result.
But then again, knowing what I know about coding (I have a few friends who are career coders), it seems to be getting increasingly cutthroat - too many terms or restrictions on ones work and the contractor just moves onto someone else who will bend to their whims and desires instead.
No different than you working for a company full time with them taking ownership of the code.
As a client, they're entitled to 'buy' your services for a product that they can do whatever they please with after the fact. You can set up exclusions of libraries (zero knowledge of coding here) but I think it's fairly standard.
Similar to an app developer doing the code for someone to sell the app...the person who hired you for the code gets to profit from the work. Same as you're profiting from the work you're doing to get to that stage.
As a client, they're entitled to 'buy' your services for a product that they can do whatever they please with after the fact. You can set up exclusions of libraries (zero knowledge of coding here) but I think it's fairly standard.
Similar to an app developer doing the code for someone to sell the app...the person who hired you for the code gets to profit from the work. Same as you're profiting from the work you're doing to get to that stage.
Riceburner
Well-known member
I used to keep the negs, but found it easier to sell them. Not too many reprints after the initial fact. Depends on the particular client too.
You're right, you do need legal advice... but you're not going to get it here.
You should talk to a lawyer, no, you should talk to multiple lawyers, and get one on retainer. You're going to need a lawyer to write the sales contract... or do you plan on doing that yourself?
I don't think you really understand what you are selling.
You should talk to a lawyer, no, you should talk to multiple lawyers, and get one on retainer. You're going to need a lawyer to write the sales contract... or do you plan on doing that yourself?
I don't think you really understand what you are selling.
Ex Soft Dev here.
A company always/most of the time keep everything for them, they own everything (and they state that), whatever library/service/etc you use you need to specify the licensing (and most of the time get their approval before using them).
If you sell libraries (or have your own project that you will be integrating), if it's open source, I don't see the problem. If not, def you need a lawyer for licensing.
But it Sounds like is not a company but "a person",dealing with a "person" with "Startup ideas" is a whole diff thing. If they worry too much about ownership I'll just pass, not worth the money... but that's more like a pov.
A company always/most of the time keep everything for them, they own everything (and they state that), whatever library/service/etc you use you need to specify the licensing (and most of the time get their approval before using them).
If you sell libraries (or have your own project that you will be integrating), if it's open source, I don't see the problem. If not, def you need a lawyer for licensing.
But it Sounds like is not a company but "a person",dealing with a "person" with "Startup ideas" is a whole diff thing. If they worry too much about ownership I'll just pass, not worth the money... but that's more like a pov.
