And if you share it across companies, then you will have violated every known law on IP....if there exists a "Work for Hire" agreement or anything closely approaching such an agreement.
From: b_alen Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 1:55 PM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: [flexcoders] Re: OOP and Work for Hire So if I create a great algorithm for collision detection while working for a client I can not use it ever again? And if I have to make it for 10 different clients in a year, I have to create 10 completely different solutions for the same problem, so I don't copy. First of all that's impossible. Second, if I do use the same knowledge and techniques like you said, then the code is of secondary importance anyway. I can heavily refactor the code and change all the variable names but the heart of the algorithm will stay the same. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Doug McCune" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Typed code is what you are paid to deliver. That is what the client is > buying. When the client pays you you are selling those digital lines of > code. > > I just wrote a book for wiley. I cannot copy and paste any of the prose that > I wrote and post it on my blog. It belongs to wiley. I sold it to them (for > almost nothing, but that's beside the point). Yes, I can take the knowledge > I gained while writing that book and write completely new tutorials that I > post on my blog (although a non-compete prohibits me from writing a > competitive book). But the instant I copy and paste something I am breaking > the legal contract that I signed. > > The original question was about taking the exact code that was created for > one client and using it in another project (either for a client or as open > source code for the community). I don't think there's much of a legal gray > area here. Yes, everyone agrees that the knowledge and techniques that you > gain while writing code are yours and can often be used in other projects. > But that is not at all the same as saying it's ok to copy a class or chunks > of code verbatim. > > Doug > > On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:48 AM, b_alen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > That's exactly what I was saying from the beginning. Typing code is > > not programming, as some on this thread think. Using your experience > > and knowledge to solve problems is programming. And nobody can take > > away that. I can delete all the code I have and I'll make even better > > in no time, once I cracked the problems and figured out the best > > architecture for certain business needs. > > > > > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>, "Kerry > > Thompson" <alpha@> wrote: > > > > > > Jeffry Houser wrote: > > > > > > > It really depends on what that knowledge is. > > > > > > That's really key. Let me give you a real-world example involving code, > > > rather than hardwood floors and toothbrushes ;-) > > > > > > I've specialized in localization and internationalization for 15-20 > > years. > > > I'm bilingual, so that helps--that's a pre-existing skill I bring to > > every > > > job, and no contract is ever going to take that away from me. > > > > > > About 10-15 years ago, in the Windows 3.1 days, I wrote a library, > > in C, to > > > display Chinese characters on English Windows 3.1. It was breakthrough > > > technology back then, and Sony paid me well for it. There is no way > > I could > > > ethically or legally use that code again (it's a moot point now, of > > course). > > > > > > Last year I had a Director project in 8 languages, including 4 Asian > > > languages. The current version of Director then, MX 2004, didn't support > > > Unicode, and had no way to display Chinese. So I did what a genius > > friend of > > > mine, Mark Jonkman, did--I used a Flash sprite to display the CCJK text. > > > > > > I can't legally or ethically re-use that same code. But I can darn > > sure use > > > Flash to display Unicode text within a Director movie. It might soon > > be a > > > moot point also, since Director 11 supports Unicode, and Director 12 > > might > > > be usable, but the point is that I'm using a known, pre-existing > > technique. > > > Sure, I refined and polished it, and I'll take that skill and > > knowledge with > > > me to the next gig. Just not the code. Snippets, maybe, but not the > > whole > > > shebang. > > > > > > Cordially, > > > > > > Kerry Thompson > > > > > > > > > >
