[Xerte-dev] Re: Identifying Committers

[Pat L (pgogy)]

Nope, that isn't good.

If you work for someone, and they pay you, then the copyright in the
product is nominally theirs. The presence of a contract is explicit in the
payment to be honest (to me). The default (to me) is I would assume the IP
is theirs, and not yours (the absence of a deal to me reinforces the
default, not creates a new status)

I'm doing some work with Warwick at the mo and the terms of their basic
registration as a contractor cover IP transfer.

The nature of the feature request isn't really an issue, it's the payment.
If you work for free then the contract wouldn't be a contract any ways (no
consideration)





On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Julian Tenney <
Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:

> I'm not a lawyer either... it sounds OK to me, there are many examples
> where a feature exists because a user requested something, it doesn't make
> that feature theirs, but in most cases no money has changed hands. Other
> than the money that Warwick pay you for hosting, did any other money change
> hands for this?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] On Behalf Of David Goodwin
> Sent: 08 October 2014 11:26
> To: For Xerte technical developers
> Subject: [Xerte-dev] Re: Identifying Committers
>
>
>
> On 08/10/14 11:20, Julian Tenney wrote:
> > (I hope) that doesn't make Warwick a contributor?
>
> I wouldn't have thought so. But I'm not a lawyer.
>
>
> They [Warwick] raised an issue with the quality of video playback within
> their LOs, and upon investigation our best fix was to transcode the videos
> into html5 friendly formats -- hence the patch.
>
> We then merged that into XOT.
>
> Warwick paid us to resolve issues with their installation.
>
>
> I'd expect that the copyright of the code rests with Pale Purple - given
> there is/was no contract in place between Pale Purple and Warwick assigning
> copyright to Warwick.
>
>
> David.
>
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
> > [mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] On Behalf Of David
> > Goodwin
> > Sent: 08 October 2014 11:15
> > To: xerte at pgogywebstuff.com; For Xerte technical developers
> > Subject: [Xerte-dev] Re: Identifying Committers
> >
> > palepurple = public github accont for palepurple.
> >
> > will = employee/internal username which was sucked up in git's merge
> history when we merged the work Will did for Warwick Uni on XOT.
> >
> > David.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Pale Purple Ltd
>
> PHP Web application development and support
>
> http://www.palepurple.co.uk
> @PalePurpleLtd
> 07792 380669 / 0845 0046746
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xerte-dev mailing list
> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xerte-dev mailing list
> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and
> may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in
> error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do
> not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in
> any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this
> email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
> may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer
> system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications
> with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK
> legislation.
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/pipermail/xerte-dev/attachments/20141008/11c2ecb9/attachment-0001.html>