From PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU Fri Nov 15 01:46:31 2002 Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.109] by dpmail10.doteasy.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.13) id A27716650060; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 01:46:31 -0800 Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (209.119.0.19) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <7.007DB4A3@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 4:32:27 -0500 Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 0201 for PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 04:32:12 -0500 Received: from MITVMA (NJE origin SMTP@MITVMA) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LMail V1.2d/1.8d) with BSMTP id 5362; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 04:29:39 -0500 Received: from lmail.actcom.co.il [192.114.47.13] by mitvma.mit.edu (IBM VM SMTP Level 320) via TCP with ESMTP ; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 04:29:38 EST X-Comment: mitvma.mit.edu: Mail was sent by lmail.actcom.co.il Received: from plp.plp.home.org (p14.ta6.actcom.co.il [192.115.24.14]) by lmail.actcom.co.il (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gAF9Tah14751 for ; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:29:36 +0200 Received: from plp.plp.home.org (plp.plp.home.org [192.168.0.1]) by plp.plp.home.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35458A4917 for ; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:30:47 +0200 (IST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:30:47 +0200 Reply-To: pic microcontroller discussion list Sender: pic microcontroller discussion list From: "Peter L. Peres" Subject: Re: [OT]: Standard contract for work? To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU In-Reply-To: X-RCPT-TO: Status: R X-UIDL: 277600615 X-Evolution-Source: pop://mailinglist%40farcite.net@mail.farcite.net/ X-Evolution: 0000073f-0000 On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, William Chops Westfield wrote: *>I'm particularly wondering how people deal with the ownership of *>"library" functions developed (or just used) during a project. On *>the one hand, code that I write "for hire" belongs to the client. On the *>other hand, who wants to get sued because client 2 got the same software *>uart (or whatever) used on client 1's project originally. (This is somewhat *>easier if you already HAVE the extensive library...) The way I see it, a library is not the client's property, it is yours. He gets a unlimited usage license on the library, only in association with the product you design, and you keep all the rights. This is the way it seems to be done for larger software products. I admit that it may be hard to make it go down with a client that 200 lines of C in a file are a library he does not own and cannot reuse. Maybe if the linker is used as it should be (I do not yet use the linker - shame on me) you could distribute the library as relocatable object code (as opposed to source). That may ease some of the pain of making that contract point, about library non re-use etc., go down with the client. You could also put easter eggs in the library so you could catch fraudulent reuse later and prove it in court. A comms library that emits a copyright message on a certain set of signals comes to mind here. In a PIC just emitting a certain large (8 byte f.ex.) binary number is more feasible imho. This was previously discussed on the piclist too. $0.02 (ianal) Peter -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.