Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] open source non commercial license

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>
  • To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] open source non commercial license
  • Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 07:41:53 -0500

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)




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page