|
 |
|
 |
|
OT: Who owns the source code?
|
|
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 14:20:39 +0100, Alan Silver <...@nospam.thanx.invalid
Hello,
Sorry for the OT post, but I reckon that people here must have come
across this questions before, and may be able to help.
Say I develop a site, and upload it to my server. I then charge the
client an annual fee for hosting and maintenance.
Who owns the source code for the site? Assume that we never discussed
this in advance.
The reason for asking is that I have just finished a site for someone,
and I have had a request for another site that is structurally almost
identical. The UI side of things would look different, but the database
structure and most of the coding would be the same.
Can I just take the site I finished and modify it for the new site? If
so, I could produce the requested site in a matter of a couple of days
instead of several weeks, and still charge the same money.
Anyone any opinions on this? I'm not expecting legal advice, I just want
to know if anyone has come across this before.
TIA
--
Alan Silver
(anything added below this line is nothing to do with me)
|
| |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 15:15:20 +0100, "Mark Rae [MVP]" <...@markNOSPAMrae.net
"Alan Silver" <...@nospamthankyou.spam...
You do. When you purchase a new car, it will typically contain hundreds of
systems which are copyright to their respective manufacturers - there's no
way that you would consider that you owned the copyright on them just
because you'd bought a car which contained them... Same with software.
I always include mention of IPR in every quote. I tell potential new
customers that I will be building their application using techniques that I
have learnt over the last twenty years or so spent building applications for
other people, and that's why it will take me three weeks and not three
years. I also say that I reserve the right to use any techniques that I
learn during the building of their application in any future work I do for
other clients - it works both ways. I've never known a client to even
question this...
A question which comes up sometimes is who owns the code, which is not the
same as who owns the copyright on the code. As with the car analogy above,
you own your car, but you don't hold the copyright on any of the systems in
the car just because you own the car... Sometimes a client will ask for a
copy of the code. I will normally give them this for a small fee, but
explain that doing so will immediately invalidate any existing support
agreement.
Turning that on its head, though, there are times when I've been called in
to help out an existing development team with a specific piece of work,
maybe to develop a suite of base classes which the development team can then
reuse as they see fit in their future projects. Then, of course, the client
owns the code.
That happens all the time...
Ah, now that's a different question! Obviously you *can* do whatever you
like, but IMO to charge a client for two weeks when you've only worked two
days is a serious rip-off. Businesses in the same industry have a habit of
talking to each other and, if you were found out, you might never work in
that industry again.
If I were in this position (as explained above), I would simply explain to
the client that I can build what they want much more quickly and cheaply
than my competitors because of my existing experience with similar
applications. Tell them they can have an app in two days which would take
someone else two weeks and they'll sign the contract immediately!
--
Mark Rae
ASP.NET MVP
http://www.markrae.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 15:43:53 +0100, Alan Silver <...@nospam.thanx.invalid
In article <...@markNOSPAMrae.net
Thanks, I thought so, but I wanted to check.
Good points. Thanks for that! The main reason I was thinking of charging
the same money on this one was that I did the first site partly as a
favour as it was not for profit, and I charged a fairly low figure. By
charging the same to the second person, I would recoup some of my time.
Thanks for the comments though, definitely the right attitude!
Ta ra
--
Alan Silver
(anything added below this line is nothing to do with me)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 15:56:43 +0100, "Mark Rae [MVP]" <...@markNOSPAMrae.net
"Alan Silver" <...@nospamthankyou.spam...
Yeah, but it was your choice to charge a hefty discount for the first app...
Charging the second client full price would still be a rip-off, IMO
anyway...
--
Mark Rae
ASP.NET MVP
http://www.markrae.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 14:07:41 -0400, "gerry" <...@newsgroup.nospam
"Mark Rae [MVP]" <...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
You're not ripping anyone off.
Every company has different discounts for different customers.
Don't let what you charged/discounted one customer dictate when deciding the
price/discount for a different customer.
Although you may face a little heat if these customers ever get together and
compare costs, the deep 'not-for-profit' discount is entirely reasonable
just as a zero 'for-profit' discount is equally reasonable.
The fact that the 2 weren't both written from scratch is irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|