Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!rutgers!gatech!uflorida!mailrus!uwmcsd1!ig!agate!helios.ee.lbl.gov!ux1.lbl.gov!beard
From: beard@ux1.lbl.gov (Patrick C Beard)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: Work for Hire contracts
Message-ID: <768@helios.ee.lbl.gov>
Date: 17 Aug 88 19:26:07 GMT
References: <25638@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <730058@hpcilzb.HP.COM>
Sender: usenet@helios.ee.lbl.gov
Reply-To: beard@ux1.lbl.gov (Patrick C Beard)
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley
Lines: 32

I think another fan to the flame of this discussion is that we compare
what other professions do to control the results of their efforts.  I
think the analogy of the lawyer is a good one (though others may not).
The lawyer produces legal documents from "boiler plate" a lot of the time.
If he had to reinvent the wheel each time he takes a new job, a lot of
time would be wasted.  The customer shouldn't care how the lawyer creates
the product, he is only interested in the end product -- the document.
Another good example is the photographer.  He takes the photographs, either
processes the film himself (if he is worth anything) or has it processed
elsewhere, provides you with the finished prints, and maintains control
of the negatives as the lawyer maintains control of his boiler plates.

I do free-lance software work for people who are interested in the product
I provide, and not in doing software modifications or further development.
Therefore, I maintain strict control over all of my source code.  And, I
quite often keep libraries of general routines that I use in all of my
efforts.  If we compare this type of work to the above examples, I believe
it is clear that the programmer is on equal footing with other professionals
in his right to control his only REAL product, his source code.

Programmers who don't work for themselves are in a different situation.  A
person who codes for some defense related company is going to have a tough
time getting disks in and out the door, and for good reason.  Source code
can be both proprietary and classified in this circumstance.  The same goes
for a photographer doing reconnaisance [sp] work for the military.  He can't
expect to maintain control over his negatives in this case.

I hope this sheds some light on this subject.

Patrick Beard
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory / MacMed Software
beard@ux1.lbl.gov