PythonHack wrote: > > Hi Plonistas > I know you aren't (all) lawyers, but I could use some general guidance > in the following situation: > > Customer A hires me to develop a product that extends some AT Content > types along with code that uses those content types in a reasonably > proprietary way. It also requires new roles that represent different > 'levels' of membership. > > Customer B already wants/needs exactly the same roles set up for his/her > product. > > Customer C needs content types that are virtually identical to those > used by A, used in a slightly different but similar way. > > Question: How do you distinguish ownership/copyright and licensing of > paid work when some of the work is configurations, some is coding, some > is probably reusable or you think you 'may' be asked to do the same > thing again at a future date by other customers (or perhaps even his/her > competitor). Who owns what? > > TIA > Ian >
By default the ownership will rest with the client unless your contract specifies otherwise, you need to be able to persuade them of the long term value in investing in an open source product so that when they come back in a year they will see some benefit of the code they have given away. If this is not possible, at least you can console yourself with the knowledge that the first version of code rarely turns out as nicely as you would like ;-) Laurence -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/how-to-reconcile-copyright-licensing-of-nearly-identical-%28paid%29-products--tp1095671p1098137.html Sent from the Product Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Product-Developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/product-developers
