[consulting] Copyright

[George Lee]

>
> We stipulate that all code is released under the GPL, so it does not
> matter who owns the copywrite. If the code is GPL, even if the client
> is the copywrite owner, I still get to re-use and contribute that
> code back.
>

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.



> "Work For Hire" agreements are aimed at masking the reality of code
> creation and distribution. In fact, the person doing the work has no
> right to re-use their own code or publicly take credit for its
> creation. As such, I consider Work For Hire agreements as being
> explicitly in violation of the GPL and will never sign any contract
> that contains such an agreement.
>

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"?


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.


Peace, community, justice,
- George
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/consulting/attachments/20100424/02c97cd5/attachment.html