RE: What are a programmer's rights to what he writes? -- MIDRANGE-L

Nathan,

Very good question.  It goes even father.  If I go home at write a program
for you for your computer, who owns the copyright?  I do.  (Some people
could argue, and it has gone to court, that my company does since I am a
salaried employee, but we'll put that aside for now).  I must write a contract
specifically stating it was a Work For Hire and that the copywrite belongs
to you.  This is even different than if I sold you the copyright.  If I sold you
the copyright in a number of years I can get it back without paying (I think
it's 15 or 20 years).  In a Work For Hire, however, the copyright is yours
alone, and I can't get it back without you giving it to me.

Okay, so why the difference in a corporation?  A corporation, by definition,
is it's own entity.  It can be thought of as a person, almost.  This entity is
made up of the people who own it, and the people who work for it.  Since
I work for the corporation, the work I am doing is actually the entities, since
I am just a part of it.  (If your right arm wrote a program the program would
not belong to your right arm, but to you.  Your right arm is a part of you).

Now, a subcontractor, however, is not a part of the corporate entity, so any
work they do falls under the Work For Hire clause.  They own the copyright
unless they declare, in writing, that it is a work for hire in which case the
copyright belongs to the entity, the corporation.  Or, they sell the copyright
to the Corporation, in which case they can get the copyright back, for free,
in a number of years (again, I don't remember the exact number of years. I
just remember that when this number of years comes up the original copyright
holder has something like 6 months to claim the copyright in writing, or they
loose it forever).

Does that help any?

Regards,

Jim Langston

Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 11:07:11 -0600
From: "Nathan M. Andelin" <nathanma@haaga.com>
Subject: RE: What are a programmer's rights to what he writes?

Copyrights in this country are a product of the US Constitution and Title 17
of the US code.  The fact that they are not born by contract is a
fascinating and refreshing legal concept.  This means that new copyrights
come into existence every moment of every day all across the country
whenever some creative person expresses himself in a fixed form.
Afterwards, the rights may be transferred or shared by contract or license
or
by placing the work in the public domain.

But the huge disparity between what the law provides employees vs.
independent contractors is a puzzle to me.  The law provides independent
contractors with all rights, even though they may be paid for their work.
On the other hand, employees who create works within the scope of their
employment have no rights to their creations.

One of the ironies of this is that, in practice, there are many similarities
between employees and independent contractors.  Employees are probably just
as educated and skilled.  An independent contractor and an employee may be
working along side each other, using the same tools, etc.  and you might not
be able to tell the difference?

Why the huge disparity in the law?

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---