<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">We stipulate that all code is released under the GPL, so it does not<br>
matter who owns the copywrite. If the code is GPL, even if the client<br>
is the copywrite owner, I still get to re-use and contribute that<br>
code back.<br></blockquote><div><br>But doesn't this impact the code-writer's ability to relicense the code? Or say there is a part of the code that they want to re-use for a non-Drupal project or non-GPL project -- then they need copyright to be able to do that. <br>
</div><div><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
"Work For Hire" agreements are aimed at masking the reality of code<br>
creation and distribution. In fact, the person doing the work has no<br>
right to re-use their own code or publicly take credit for its<br>
creation. As such, I consider Work For Hire agreements as being<br>
explicitly in violation of the GPL and will never sign any contract<br>
that contains such an agreement.<br></blockquote><div><br>Can you clarify what you consider in violation -- agreements that say "this *is* work for hire," or agreements that say "this *is not* work for hire"?<br>
<br><br>Also, to clarify -- there's two different scenarios I'm thinking of. One is when a Drupal consulting company contracts out to a programmer; another is when there's basically a one-person consulting company or one person signing a contract. In the former case I could understand why the shop would want to retain ownership over the code. It's the latter case I'm asking about; I'm interested in maintaining copyright over the code I write.<br>
</div></div><br><br>Peace, community, justice,<br>- George<br>