Hacker News Reader

Comment by dpapathanasiou | Hacker News Reader

YOU own all the rights to the code, since you created it - even if they paid you.

Are you absolutely certain of that?

I'm not an attorney myself (nor am I trying to be flippant or argumentative), but it seems the combination of verbal contract, his continuing to do the work specified by his roommate, and his acceptance of payment may create problems for the O.P.

Lawyers are assholes - DON'T let him bully you into signing anything.

Very true: standard legal M.O. on the first contract document is to try to get away with anything.

I.e., they will expect you to push back and remove some terms (and if you don't, that's a bonus win for them).

View on HN

Yes, I am absolutely certain. I am not a lawyer but I was an independent programmer for 6 years and successfully resolved 3 disputes over IP in my favor.

Most programmers want to avoid any sort of conflict and confrontation, especially with lawyers. You're correct in assuming that this may create problems. The potential problem in this situation is that the lawyer dad is going to be an asshole and try to intimidate the programmer. This sucks, and the programmer should maybe back out of the project if he wants to avoid this.

His acceptance of payment / verbal contract amounts to him granting license, not transfer of copyright.

You don't have to take anybody's word for it. Most of title 17 is reasonably accessible:

Ownership:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_sec_17_00000201----...

See especially the definition of "work made for hire" here:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_sec_17_00000101----...

I'm a little confused

A “work made for hire” is— (1) a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment; or

I read that as: if someone hired you to write some code for them, then the code you write seems to be work made for hire, in which case they own the copyright.

I think this is not a work made for hire because it was done on contract rather than as an employee. From PubLaw (http://www.publaw.com/work2.html)

"But if the creator of the work is not an employee, but instead a freelancer, than the "work made for hire" requirements of the independent contractor prong must be satisfied. This means that the work must be specially ordered or commissioned by the publisher, the work must fall into one of the nine enumerated categories of work, and there must be a signed writing between the parties where they agree that the work will be considered a "work made for hire."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com