you pay for custom coding - 2 months later your script is avail retail! wtf? [drama]

[Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life]

[drama]

what the hell? i needed a bit of code written because i can't find any scripts or plugins that will do what i want them to. so i write up a specific detail of what functions i want in said script, drop top dollar to have a custon script built, and two months later unnamed programmer icq's to ask what he should charge for retail on previously mentioned work. somewhat chapped i say at least what i payed for it, to which the reply is "that's a little expensive for retail isn't it?"

so basically what i payed good money for, is going to soon be available to everyone at half the price. the script worksvery well for what i wanted it to do. programmer obviously sees this and decides he can make more money off it.

am i completely fucked for having any options here? this is kind of what i am assuming. however, at the time it was being coded i assumed that being as i payed in full for the expense of writing this code i would get some sort of exclusive use on it. i mean fuck, i paid for a custom script because i didn't want every knob i'm competing with to have what i got going on. i wanted something different.

fuck, when you pay for something like this it should be yours. maybe it's just my opinion, but whatever. i guess from now on i'll be discussing exclusivity rights before i drop any money, and to anyone else who thinks they're shit is theirs once they've bought it, you should too..

this is such a stupid ass situation, lessen learnt i guess...

[/end drama here]

[seeric]

yep.. sucks. that kinda thing happens all the time.

not only in adult.

[vvq]

you should of had them sign a contract.

[Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life]

Originally Posted by vvq

you should of had them sign a contract.

i'm realizing this now, stupid newb mistake i guess. like i said, lesson learnt. hopefully someone reads this and saves themselves the hassle somewhere down the line. all i can do is sit and shake my head and choose not to hire him for anymore projects i have.

[donkevlar]

You can't blame him for making a product out of it and selling it. Wouldn't you?

He could have refunded you or something, as the person with the idea.

[vvq]

Originally Posted by ismokeblunts

i'm realizing this now, stupid newb mistake i guess. like i said, lesson learnt. hopefully someone reads this and saves themselves the hassle somewhere down the line. all i can do is sit and shake my head and choose not to hire him for anymore projects i have.

yeah. always make people sign ndas and shit.

[Beaver Bob]

Yes, if you paid for it exclusively for you. it should not be sold at retail. And I'm a programmer. You have every right to be pissed off about this. Not sure what you can do, other than expose him?

[Jon Clark - BANNED FOR LIFE]

Where do you think these guys get there ideas from?

People like you and I that come up with them...

Next thing you know our great idea is net wide for everyone!

[tical]

yea fuck that, when he goes to sell it you should get a % of that

otherwise expose his dirty business practicies... i'd be furious if i was you

[crockett]

Expose him when he releases the script..

[Napolean]

You should drop the programmers name in here so noone else works with him, thats a very shady thing for a programmer to do. Its common sense that custom work is 99% of the time exclusive as well, which means.. you dont want copies for sale all over.

It's also bullshit that you financed the production of the software and that the programmer is now turning around and reselling it for even cheaper. Why did you have to pay more than everyone else? If he was going to resell it later he should have charged you retail as well.

I would argue that he doesnt have the right to resell, you didnt give him rights to resell and it was never discussed either. It might not be in your favor legally since you didnt sign a Non-Competitive or Non-Disclosure Agreement, but if this programmer has any class and would like future clients to trust him, he should honor what he already knows you wanted.

[Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life]

like i said, i made the stupid newb mistake of just assuming that paying for custom coding bought you your custom code. end of story.

You can't blame him for making a product out of it and selling it. Wouldn't you?

i paid a fair price to cover the time spent working on the project. i assume that when i pay for something like that, that it is mine afterwards. say you drop top dollar to get your new car painted some wierd fucking color. wouldn't you be chapped if the shop painted 40 other cars the exact same color and sold them all off at half what you paid the next week?

i've designed several blogs for people, i don't just rework blog designs i've already done and hock them off for easy money, or post up the same blog designs a week later offering them for 40 bucks or something...

[BobG]

you should talk to a lawyer who knows about "intellectual property"

[WiredGuy]

Non Compete's and Non Disclosure's would have resolved this...
WG

[WarChild]

Unless he signed away the rights to the code, you only have a license to use it. It still belongs to him. That's the way it works.

[Jon Clark - BANNED FOR LIFE]

Why don't you just package it up and sell it yourself and undercut his ass?

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by BobG

you should talk to a lawyer who knows about "intellectual property"

The Lawyer's going to ask to see the release of the intellectual property rights, which he of course does not have.

I used to work for a large Forestry company. By large I mean close to $1B a year in revenue. The exact same thing happened. Some coders were hired under contract to write custom code, but the IT manager at the time had no idea really what he was doing. In the end, they ended up reselling the same code and we were left with only a license to use and modify the code.

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by Jon Clark

Why don't you just package it up and sell it yourself and undercut his ass?

Because he doesn't own the Intellectual Property Rights.

[Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life]

Originally Posted by Jon Clark

Why don't you just package it up and sell it yourself and undercut his ass?

thought noted...

[spacedog]

Originally Posted by WarChild

Unless he signed away the rights to the code, you only have a license to use it. It still belongs to him. That's the way it works.

That's 100% FALSE. You make this shit up or what?

On a work for hire, the person contracting the work owns the rights, not the other way around.

I'd sue the bejesus out of the fucker.

Stop asking gfy.. half of these idiots wouldn't know their ass from their elbow.. Go ask an attorney.


The person paying for the project owns the rights.

When you hire a designer to design your site, do they resell it to everyone else after they deliver it to you?

Some people need a fucking clue!

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by spacedog

That's 100% FALSE. You make this shit up or what?

On a work for hire, the person contracting the work owns the rights, not the other way around.

I'd sue the bejesus out of the fucker.

Stop asking gfy.. half of these idiots wouldn't know their ass from their elbow.. Go ask an attorney.


The person paying for the project owns the rights.

When you hire a designer to design your site, do they resell it to everyone else after they deliver it to you?

Some people need a fucking clue!

I'm speaking from experience, working in a large company, with a legal department that took up an entire floor. This was in Canada though.

[Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life]

as far a legality goes i'm fucked, anyway i really come at this situation i am not going to win.

best case scenario: coder realizes people frown upon this, and there is a last minute decision to not release the script in order to maintain a reputable name.

worst case scenario: every douchebag running wordpress now has my script running on their blogs. maybe a few other newbs see this and learn my lesson the easy way instead of the hard, which is all i can hope for at this point...

[crockett]

Originally Posted by WarChild

Unless he signed away the rights to the code, you only have a license to use it. It still belongs to him. That's the way it works.

BS.. he didn't buy a license for a software he bought and paid for the development of that software. So the code is his, however without a Non Compete or a No Disclosure he's SOL. More than likely.

His best bet is to use the net warrior code and out the guy, so others know they can't trust him.

[Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life]

just had a friend pass this on to me http://www.aw-wrdsmth.com/FAQ/work_for_hire.html

anyone looking to have some work done might find this useful...

[Superterrorizer]

Originally Posted by spacedog

That's 100% FALSE. You make this shit up or what?

On a work for hire, the person contracting the work owns the rights, not the other way around.

I'd sue the bejesus out of the fucker.

Stop asking gfy.. half of these idiots wouldn't know their ass from their elbow.. Go ask an attorney.


The person paying for the project owns the rights.

When you hire a designer to design your site, do they resell it to everyone else after they deliver it to you?

Some people need a fucking clue!

Coming from a guy who had an argument with an ICQ bot...


I'm just a sexy girl!

[spacedog]

Originally Posted by WarChild

Because he doesn't own the Intellectual Property Rights.

On the contrary, HE DOES!! He contracted & hired the work, he owns the work.

Stop shitting from your mouth & speaking out your ass.


USC Title 17, circular 92, chapter 2 section 201B

"b) Works Made for Hire. ? In the case of a work made for hire, the employer or other person for whom the work was prepared is considered the author for purposes of this title, and, unless the parties have expressly agreed otherwise in a written instrument signed by them, owns all of the rights comprised in the copyright"


The person paying for the work owns ALL RIGHTS.. not the other way around.

[LiveDose]

Feel free to email me the persons info so I don't use him for any future work. Shady.

livedose // at // gmail // dot // com

Others may want this info as well.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by ismokeblunts

as far a legality goes i'm fucked, anyway i really come at this situation i am not going to win.

best case scenario: coder realizes people frown upon this, and there is a last minute decision to not release the script in order to maintain a reputable name.

worst case scenario: every douchebag running wordpress now has my script running on their blogs. maybe a few other newbs see this and learn my lesson the easy way instead of the hard, which is all i can hope for at this point...

You could always really undercut him and release it GPL being it's a word press script. That would make his script sales pretty much worthless, so he likely wouldn't make any more money from it.

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by spacedog

Stop shitting from your mouth & speaking out your ass.

I guess the laws vary alot between Canada and the US. I should have pointed out initially that I was speaking about Canadian law.

Like I told you, I lived through this exact experience, but on a much, much larger scale.

No need to be a mouthy little twit about it, douche bag.

[Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life]

Originally Posted by crockett

You could always really undercut him and release it GPL being it's a word press script. That would make his script sales pretty much worthless, so he likely wouldn't make any more money from it.

and then even more people wind up with it. haha.

no, i'm content to just sit and see where things go from here, i'll be waiting to see the post here when the script is offered for sale, i already know it's coming, and when it does i'll be sure to reference this thread in that one. hopefully i never see that day, but who knows, it's out of my hands one way or another.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Get DNA's or Work For Hire contracts signed next time...

if anyone is really concerned about the info on the coder they can contact me on icq. until then, i'm not going to out anyone publicly. i'm sure he will read this, and if the day comes that i do see the script for sale on gfy (which i'm sure is still going to happen regardless of whatever i say), he will be outed. this is his chance to not release the script and save some face...

[Nodtveidt]

spacedog is correct: the work belongs to YOU, since you contracted it. What this guy's planning to do is technically illegal. If you can prove that you contracted the work, you can more than likely sue when he tries selling it. I don't know all the legalities of this particular incident though, you really need to seek a lawyer's guidance for this one.

And ummm...spacedog...relax a bit, eh? No need to be ultravulgar, there are ladies present.

[Jon Clark - BANNED FOR LIFE]

http://www.uspto.gov/ Just go apply for the patent and you hold the power...


Also as far as the little research I just did says you hold the IPR on the script as the inventor... The programmer has no rights...

[~Ray]

who is it?

[Jon Clark - BANNED FOR LIFE]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent

Them links might help you with some info also.... Good luck!

[SmokeyTheBear]

from a programmers view point..................

I would think it in poor taste to sell the exact same script, as far as the idea.. you have learned your lesson. Dont give programmers ideas you dont want them to use unless they sign an agreement not to use the idea "nda".

While i havent found myself in this exact scenario, sometimes people do ask for customization of scripts and i then use and resell those ideas, but they arent the main part of the script...

example. lets say i built a program called "notepad.exe" and you want the program but you would like to add a feature " it would be great to have such and such added " so i customize it for you , i dont see anything wrong with using that idea unless the person has asked me not to ( and people do ask these things from time to time )

Infact heres a real world situation that is quite similar to yours..

YOUTUBE. has its flash video player. they licensed the software from another company ( to do video to swf ), of course being a large company ( youtube ) they wanted certain customizations to the script, these same customizations are now available to anyone else who buys the same software.. now we dont know if it was youtube who thought up the ideas or the software writer but i imagine it was prob a bit of both.. kinda sucks for youtube that its unique features can be used by anyone else who buys the software right..

In your situation it is a "mod" not a complete program so while i do feel for you i cant really blame the programmer for seeing the potential in the idea and wanting to profit from it..

Personally if i was your programmer i would have said " hey this idea has potential" and split the profits.. the key thing most people miss is, anyone can program an idea, not everyone can think up ideas for a program so theres value in the original person who thought up the idea.. not just the software. i would rather have %50 of 3 great ideas than 100% of one..

[SmokeyTheBear]

p.s. as far as the legal standpoint, your sol. if you try to resell the script or give it away you will likely get sued and lose.

While you "may" have a legal right against him using the exact same code, he can modify the code and resell the idea unless he signed something saying he couldn't

[StuartD]

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

Non Compete's and Non Disclosure's would have resolved this...
WG

[Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life]

i don't want to hype things too far out of proportion. the script itself is nothing overly unique. it's not a mind shattering breakthrough in technology or anything. basically it is a gallery builder/thumbcropper/image viewer rolled into one with a few seo tpe functions, it works within wordpress and pumps out galleries pretty well. i'd say it's safe to say that it blows arylia out of the water, but i never used arylia that much. i am just pissed that other people are now going to be able to purchase a script i thought would be exclusive and unique to my network, at a fraction of the cost i paid for it.

i'm out on this thread for now, i have work to do (installing my soon to be public script on another new blog actually, woot). the issue has been layed out and i understand where i stand now, the lesson has been learnt, hopefully someone else learns something from my mistake. and if anyone decides its something they want to purchase on release day, you know where to find me, lol

[woj]

good article addressing this issue:
http://www.developerdotstar.com/mag/...copyright.html

For those that are too lazy to read the whole thing -> "The software developer is the copyright owner."

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by woj

good article addressing this issue:
http://www.developerdotstar.com/mag/...copyright.html

For those that are too lazy to read the whole thing -> "The software developer is the copyright owner."

That's exactly how it played out, in Canada, in the example I gave that I was involved in. The contractor was not considered an employee, and there was no valid employer-employee relationship.

"In our case, the bare facts indicate that the software designer is not the shop owner's employee. As a result, the employee portion of the "work for hire" doctrine does not apply."

[joshuawk]

[QUOTE=Napolean;12146810]You should drop the programmers name in here so noone else works with him, thats a very shady thing for a programmer to do. Its common sense that custom work is 99% of the time exclusive as well, which means.. you dont want copies for sale all over.

It's also bullshit that you financed the production of the software and that the programmer is now turning around and reselling it for even cheaper. Why did you have to pay more than everyone else? If he was going to resell it later he should have charged you retail as well.


Whenever I talk to programmers, they try to say I have to pay 40% more if I want to keep my ideas/software exclusive, not resold, or remade, plagarized, etc.

but I'm a push over for a lot of things and dont have the best connections. In the programming world, what is the STANDARD etiquette as far as innovative software ideas are concerned?

If you think of some revolutionary software and pay good rates to have it made, are you supposed to pay 40% extra to keep it private, even then they could still clone it and make a few changes to say they didnt copy you.

What is the main consensus moral wise in the programming community on this? I have like 10 programs ive never had made because I dont trust that it wont be resold or copied in some way unless I get in house programmers that sign their life away

[aico]

Unless a full release is signed, the person who CREATES the work owns it and holds all copyrights to it.

The same goes for design. If I design a logo, I own that logo until otherwise stated by either a usage rights agreement or full release. This usually determines the price. I have designed many logos in the past that were only allowed to be used for signage, then the client wanted to make t-shirts & hats with the logo, they were required to pay me more for that, because the original price was based on the usage only being for the sign.

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by spacedog

On the contrary, HE DOES!! He contracted & hired the work, he owns the work.

Stop shitting from your mouth & speaking out your ass.


USC Title 17, circular 92, chapter 2 section 201B

"b) Works Made for Hire. ? In the case of a work made for hire, the employer or other person for whom the work was prepared is considered the author for purposes of this title, and, unless the parties have expressly agreed otherwise in a written instrument signed by them, owns all of the rights comprised in the copyright"


The person paying for the work owns ALL RIGHTS.. not the other way around.

The circumstances in which a work is considered a work made for hire is determined by the language of the United States Copyright Act:

Works Made for Hire. -- (1) a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment; or (2) a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, f the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire. 17 U.S.C. sec 101

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by aico

Unless a full release is signed, the person who CREATES the work owns it and holds all copyrights to it.

The same goes for design. If I design a logo, I own that logo until otherwise stated by either a usage rights agreement or full release. This usually determines the price. I have designed many logos in the past that were only allowed to be used for signage, then the client wanted to make t-shirts & hats with the logo, they were required to pay me more for that, because the original price was based on the usage only being for the sign.

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what I said, before Spacedog told us he was the expert.

[joshuawk]

Originally Posted by aico

Unless a full release is signed, the person who CREATES the work owns it and holds all copyrights to it.

The same goes for design. If I design a logo, I own that logo until otherwise stated by either a usage rights agreement or full release. This usually determines the price. I have designed many logos in the past that were only allowed to be used for signage, then the client wanted to make t-shirts & hats with the logo, they were required to pay me more for that, because the original price was based on the usage only being for the sign.

Yes but does even a full release protect your software you contracted out from being slightly modified and then resold?

you'd need ke XPAYS legal team to truly protect contract for hire work wouldnt you?

I'm thinking the only way software you 'think of' would truly be safe is to hire someone inhouse, locally, via PAYROLL as your employee, AND make him sign NDA, non compete? and more papers probably.

[AmeliaG]

Given how quickly the original poster here went from WTF to NP, I have to wonder if this is just a promo thread for a soon-to-be-released script.

[WarChild]

Looks to me like Spacedog was half right. You would be the copy right holder if it were a work made for hire. This however does not appear to meet the standards as defined by 17 USC 101

A "work made for hire" is--

(1)
a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment; or

(2)
a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire. For the purpose of the foregoing sentence, a "supplementary work" is a work prepared for publication as a secondary adjunct to a work by another author for the purpose of introducing, concluding, illustrating, explaining, revising, commenting upon, or assisting in the use of the other work, such as forewords, afterwords, pictorial illustrations, maps, charts, tables, editorial notes, musical arrangements, answer material for tests, bibliographies, appendixes, and indexes, and an "instructional text" is a literary, pictorial, or graphic work prepared for publication and with the purpose of use in systematic instructional activities.

In this case, the programmer was not an employee AND the work does not fall in to the defined scope of the second section. Specifically, this is software and NOT a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas.

[fallenmuffin]

If you don't want a programmer to resell your work you have to get them to sign a Non-disclosure agreement. Otherwise expect it to be on the open market or sold privately.

[Napolean]

Originally Posted by joshuawk

Whenever I talk to programmers, they try to say I have to pay 40% more if I want to keep my ideas/software exclusive, not resold, or remade, plagarized, etc.

but I'm a push over for a lot of things and dont have the best connections. In the programming world, what is the STANDARD etiquette as far as innovative software ideas are concerned?

If you think of some revolutionary software and pay good rates to have it made, are you supposed to pay 40% extra to keep it private, even then they could still clone it and make a few changes to say they didnt copy you.

What is the main consensus moral wise in the programming community on this? I have like 10 programs ive never had made because I dont trust that it wont be resold or copied in some way unless I get in house programmers that sign their life away

You tell the programmers beforehand you dont want your ideas leaked or resold and if they wont honor that, move on. If the programmer agrees, get a NDA to be on the safe side if your ideas are valuable.

When I use to do client work, I would agree with my clients that if the software was for their personal use I would charge my usual fee. However if I was producing the software to be resold by THEM then I would charge extra or contract a cut of the sales.

You should never have to pay EXTRA to keep YOUR ideas your own. Thats my point of view anyways, it would be nice if most people thought the same way.

[Napolean]

edit: bad timing