Development of Creative Commons licenses

[drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>]

On Tuesday 06 February 2007 04:20 am, Mark Brown wrote:
>>     For instance, if i were a large government
> > consulting firm hired to develop a piece of software worth millions of
> > dollars for the government, there would be nothing to stop me from
> > using QT internally as the basis for this implementation.
>
> In that particular case I'm not entirely sure if they'd be able to do that:
> when the commercial firm gives the software to the government that may well
> be distribution. A clear example would be something like software developed
> in house to control a production line where the software is never given to
> anyone else.

Mark,

my take was that what would control it was who got the copyright on the work.

If I as a consultant go to work for company X to write some software for them 
where they will be the copyright holder (work for hire?) then when I write it 
for them and they end up with it, there is no distribution right. It would be 
no different than if I were an employee.

If, on the ohter hand, I get the copyright to the software, then when the 
company ends up with it, there has been distribution. Right? Wrong? More 
complicated?

Along similar lines, even if I am an employee, if I managed to get a contract 
where I own the copyrights to software created by myself, there would be 
distribution if my employer ends up with software I create for them. Yes? No?

all the best,

drew

-- 
(da idea man)