[consulting] Copyright

Sun Apr 25 15:55:18 UTC 2010

On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 3:53 PM, nan wich <nan_wich at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> Well, Alex, as a developer, I love that wording. However, if I were the
customer I would never sign such a contract. While I would probably allow
you to contribute back to Drupal, that would be my decision, not yours to
make.
>
Then they most likely won't get a good Drupal developer, all of whom will
want to retain the right to submit back patches, modules, etc. that are
created through the project.

> Your analogy just doesn't make sense to me. I wouldn't even dream of
claiming the tools I used for my own. But I can guarantee you that the
author of that book will enforce his/her copyright to the contents.
>

You're misunderstanding the situation here on a fundamental level. I am
talking about keeping ownership of the tools we created which were used by
the client to write the book (i.e. Office, Open Office, or even a pencil and
paper), not the text or even the physical book itself (i.e. 'Fight Club' or
'Curious George'). Here's another paragraph from our contract that should
clarify what we are, and are not, applying the GPL to.

*Company Materials*.   **
In connection with performance of the Website Services, the Company shall
provide all creative, content and other material for the Company Website, or
provide written approval for the Consultant Firm's creation of the same
(collectively, the "*Company Materials*").  The Company Material shall
include (1) the contents of the Company's Drupal database and other data
generated by the Company or by users of the Company Website; (2) the
Company's contributions such as the Company Website's content; (3) and the
Company's domain names, marks and logos.  Company Materials shall not
include any Drupal software, the Consultant Firm's Drupal-related techniques
and procedures, or any other material covered by the GNU GPL.

> While working for someone else, I have now developed at least three
modules that the general public might want. I have received permission from
the companies that I wrote them for to submit them to DO. One is already
live, and I have two more that need to be cleaned up before I can submit
them. On the two most recent, the company doesn't even want attribution,
although I think they deserve it.
>

It's fine for you to ask them for permission, and keep in mind that we do as
well, we just do it at the beginning before we even get started. Also keep
in mind that *by far* the vast majority of items we are contributing back *are
not modules*, but rather patches to existing core and contrib modules, which
makes your process impossible or irresponsibly lengthy. (you can get an idea
of the different types of contributions we make here, though we don't list
the vast majority of our patches:
http://www.zivtech.com/community/contributions )

In the end our clients gain a very large amount of value from our way of
working with Open Source. If you aren't contributing your patches back than
you are essentially forking Drupal and/or the modules you're patching, and
you must maintain those patches for the life of the project. Our way of
working makes their site more stable, easier to work with for future
developers, and lowers the long term costs for maintaining the site's code
base. And that's why we've never had a client back away from a deal as a
result of the clause I posted before.

> Nancy E. Wichmann, PMP
>
> Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. -- Dr. Martin L.
King, Jr.
>
> ________________________________
> From: Alex Urevick-Ackelsberg <alex at zivtech.com>
> To: A list for Drupal consultants and Drupal service/hosting providers <
consulting at drupal.org>
> Sent: Sat, April 24, 2010 11:16:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [consulting] Copyright
>
> While IANAL, here's a part of our standard contract that deals with this:
> ---
>
>  Proprietary Rights.
>
> The Drupal software programs used by Consultant Firm, and all of the
associated modules and themes installed on the Company Website are licensed
under a GNU General Public License, and all code and techniques shall be
licensed as the same and may be submitted back to the Drupal software
community as the Consultant Firm sees fit. Nothing in this Agreement shall
preclude the Consultant Firm from using in any manner or for any purpose it
deems necessary the know-how, techniques or procedures acquired or used by
Consultant Firm in the performance of the Website Services (the
"Drupal-Related Techniques and Procedures"), and same shall remain
Consultant Firm's sole and exclusive intellectual property.  To the extent
necessary for operation of the Company Website, the Consultant Firm grants
to the Company a non-exclusive and non-transferrable license to use the
Drupal-Related Techniques and Procedures.
>
> ---
>
> In my opinion, a client that ask for IP rights over your Drupal related
work is equivalent to an author writing The Best Book of all Time on MS
Office and then claiming that, because of their brilliant writing, they now
own Office and everyone who uses Office must now pay them a royalty. They
own the site, but the tools aren't theirs, and if they need IP rights over
everything that runs their site/application then they shouldn't use Open
Source.
>
> --
> Alex Urevick-Ackelsberg
> Partner | Business Lead
> Zivtech, LLC
> http://zivtech.com
> alex at zivtech.com
> office: (267) 940-7737
> cell: (215) 866-8956
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 7:48 AM, Jeremy Weiss <eccentric.one at gmail.com>
wrote:
>>
>> From Circular 9, by the US Copyright Office (
www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf)
>>
>>
>>
>> Under the 1976 Copyright Act as amended (title 17 of the United States
Code),
>>
>> a work is protected by copyright from the time it is created in a ﬁxed
form. In
>>
>> other words, when a work is written down or otherwise set into tangible
form,
>>
>> the copyright immediately becomes the property of the author who created
it.
>>
>> Only the author or those deriving their rights from the author can
rightfully
>>
>> claim copyright.
>>
>> Although the general rule is that the person who creates a work is the
author
>>
>> of that work, there is an exception to that principle: the copyright law
deﬁnes a
>>
>> category of works called “works made for hire.” If a work is “made for
hire,” the
>>
>> employer, and not the employee, is considered the author. The employer
may
>>
>> be a ﬁrm, an organization, or an individual.
>>
>> To understand the complex concept of a work made for hire, it is
necessary
>>
>> to refer not only to the statutory deﬁnition but also to its
interpretation in cases
>>
>> decided by courts.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Basically, I've always been told by various attorney's that unless my
agreement with a client specifically stated that it wasn't a work for made
for hire situation, then it was. YMMV, IANAL, etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> -jeremy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: consulting-bounces at drupal.org [mailto:consulting-bounces at drupal.org]
On Behalf Of George Lee
>> Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 7:55 AM
>> To: consulting at drupal.org
>> Subject: [consulting] Copyright
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> When folks are doing contract work developing modules, is it typical to
retain copyright over code or to give copyright to the folks who are
contracting out to you? Do folks have legal contract language for both
scenarios?
>>
>> Peace, community, justice,
>> - George
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> consulting mailing list
>> consulting at drupal.org
>> http://lists.drupal.org/mailman/listinfo/consulting
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> consulting mailing list
> consulting at drupal.org
> http://lists.drupal.org/mailman/listinfo/consulting
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/consulting/attachments/20100425/24510275/attachment-0001.html 