Don't put your bollocks to my bollocks dude :) :) Steve White: Oh I think it's across the board. Typically, whenever people are in a position of power, or think they're in a position of power, is when it most likely arises.
Yes, there are clients who will screw your happiness in every way they could. I guess you have to be careful when picking the clients. If you feel that something might go bad, talk to them and discuss, usually that's all it takes. In my "work for hire" experience not only that I reused my code, but with clients we collectively worked in improving each other's the code base. So if you one wants to be completely covered I suggest before doing the coding you take a pill that will erase your memory completely after the project. Of course, I would never sell the exact same solution I did for a client to somebody else. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "barry.beattie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > BOLLOCKS to your BOLLOCKS! > > (no offence intended, Alen) > > > I wish it was as clear-cut as you say, but there's a large grey areas > there (this is just dealing with a class library, not a whole application) > > http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/lawrpt/stories/s295800.htm > > (about half way down) > > "Steve White: The key factor is that Section 35-6 of the Copyright Act > says that works written by an employee within the scope of their > employment belonged to their employer. In a nutshell, that's the key. > And this mistake is often made by a lot of people that think that when > they work for someone else the things that they write for their > employer actually belong to them, rather than belonging to their > employer. And that I think is the most important part of the decision." > > "What also was very interesting was the way that the judge actually > worked out what was written within the scope of one's employment, and > what wasn't. And it's true to say a bit of time was spent looking at > the date and time stamps on various files to see when they were > written, were they written during the day, outside business hours, or > when they were written; and we certainly spent some time doing a bit > of expert analysis on getting that and working that out." > > > > > > > > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "b_alen" <alen.balja@> wrote: > > > > BOLLOCKS!! Of course you can reuse your code. You're code is not > > stored in AS files anyway, but in your head. So unless you can erase > > memory how you cracked the algorithm or designed a system, there's no > > way you could not reuse the code. Since every project is different in > > nature, there's a very small chance you will end up copy pasting the > > entire solution for the new client. So in reality you will take bits > > and pieces from old projects, even improve the code a bit, write some > > new stuff and that's it. > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Amy" <amyblankenship@> wrote: > > > > > > I was recently asked to sign an agreement that would designate a Flex > > > project as "Work for Hire." I.e. I would not retain any ownership of > > > the code I wrote for the project. This seems to defeat the > purpose of > > > OOP, if I create a whole body of code that I can't then reuse. > How do > > > most Flex developers handle the idea of Work for Hire? > > > > > > Thanks; > > > > > > Amy > > > > > >
