Having one of those Silly discussions. [modified]
-
I am having what I think to be one of the silliest discussions I have ever had with a client's legal and non-technical management. It's about code ownership and licensing. I agree completely with them that they own and should own every line of code and comment that they pay us to write. But, and this is the reason they hired us, we have an existing code base that will be used in the project as it's core. I am guessing I will just have go around them/over their heads and get the engineering lead who made the decision to use our services into the discussion. I hate doing that since I like to treat everybody (and be treated) as an adult. But, this silliness is just taking up too much time and it's incredibly annoying that people are this obtuse. This may not be controversial enough for the "Back Room" but I'd thought I get this little rant off my chest. [Edit] It's been handled. The lead engineer called along with the manager to make nice so we can get started on Monday. Thank goodness, I am hopping on a plane to S. Korea Tuesday morning; one thing I don't have to worry about.
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --?
modified on Thursday, April 2, 2009 4:06 PM
Setup a licensing agreement for the base code that you've already invested resources into that they didn't pay for. I'm going through the same scenario on a side project of mine. They own the code that's specific to their application and license the base.
Chris Austin wrote:
This may not be controversial enough for the "Back Room" but I'd thought I get this little rant off my chest.
The backroom has no qualifiers for posting.... ;)
This statement is false
-
Setup a licensing agreement for the base code that you've already invested resources into that they didn't pay for. I'm going through the same scenario on a side project of mine. They own the code that's specific to their application and license the base.
Chris Austin wrote:
This may not be controversial enough for the "Back Room" but I'd thought I get this little rant off my chest.
The backroom has no qualifiers for posting.... ;)
This statement is false
-
Setup a licensing agreement for the base code that you've already invested resources into that they didn't pay for. I'm going through the same scenario on a side project of mine. They own the code that's specific to their application and license the base.
Chris Austin wrote:
This may not be controversial enough for the "Back Room" but I'd thought I get this little rant off my chest.
The backroom has no qualifiers for posting.... ;)
This statement is false
Synaptrik wrote:
Setup a licensing agreement for the base code that you've already invested resources into that they didn't pay for.
That's what got this whole thing started. But, as updated it has been handled by the man in charge.
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --?
-
Chris Austin wrote:
The engineering manager has assured me it will be handled today
The advantages of working with a smaller, more technically oriented company. In my case no-one with any technical background was every questioned by the lawyers. Only the head of the division (She had moved over from Marketing as part of getting her ticket punched so she could move up in the hierarchy.) "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers!" ~ Shakespeare.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers!" ~ Shakespeare.
But if you kill all the lawyers, who do you get to defend you on the homocide changes?
10110011001111101010101000001000001101001010001010100000100000101000001000111100010110001011001011
-
Oakman wrote:
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers!" ~ Shakespeare.
But if you kill all the lawyers, who do you get to defend you on the homocide changes?
10110011001111101010101000001000001101001010001010100000100000101000001000111100010110001011001011
-
Synaptrik wrote:
The backroom has no qualifiers for posting
How about owning a pair of brass balls? Or at least balls - notice how all the chicks took flight?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Synaptrik wrote:
Setup a licensing agreement for the base code that you've already invested resources into that they didn't pay for.
That's what got this whole thing started. But, as updated it has been handled by the man in charge.
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --?
-
Ok, I should have added some qualifiers... balls being one, or at least the facsimile there of, the Tigress has been here since the changeover. And.... it requires some thick skin. Bark-like even.
This statement is false
Synaptrik wrote:
the Tigress has been here since the changeover.
Are you sure? :confused: Although that doesn't necessarily mean I was wrong. I'd never call her a "chick," and her balls, though metaphoric, are quite brazen.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
MidwestLimey wrote:
But if you kill all the lawyers, who do you get to defend you
The firm of Colt, Smith and Wesson. :-D
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
How did I know you would answer with that?
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --?
-
How did I know you would answer with that?
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --?
-
Synaptrik wrote:
the Tigress has been here since the changeover.
Are you sure? :confused: Although that doesn't necessarily mean I was wrong. I'd never call her a "chick," and her balls, though metaphoric, are quite brazen.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface