hallett@hamlet.steinmetz (Jeff A. Hallett) (01/28/88)
In article <7982@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU> merchant@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU (Peter Merchant) writes: >a) At many collegiate institutions, you buy your personal computer and you >agree that you will not be using it for business purposes. So, if I bought my >Macintosh through the campus computer store, then I bought Lightspeed Pascal >(or C or whatever) and I wrote this neat program, is it legal for me to charge >money for it? No, however, agreements like this are only binding for a specific period of time. Note that $hareware is not "business"; you are providing a program to the community. The fact that you suggest people send you $5 or $10, is not business as much as contribution because they are really getting nothing additional for their money. It become business if you withhold functionality or documentation, forwardable only upon receipt of cash payment (Scholar's Aid, for example). Note that people who promise upgrade notices also are not conducting business unless they don't send updates to public installations. The fact that you give them "first-dibs" because they donated is an added service - telling people that they will not receive updates unless they register is business because then you are selling the service. > >b) At many collegiate institutions, you have "public" Macintoshes (ie, a room >of Macs set up for people to use.) If I were to buy a programming language >and write the same neat program that I wrote above, is it legal for me to >charge money for it? Is the college, who owns the machine that I did the work >on, legally entitled to some percentage of the money that I make? > No. The program you write on a public machine is constructed from your ideas. The notion of a public machine is that the machine is there for the use of anyone, regardless of their purpose. Where your ideas are made functional does not matter (except, see below). Note that this is different than for (a) because in (a) you are agreeing to limit what you do. There is no such limit imposed in (b). The college has incurred the cost of making that machine public and it is technically illegal for them to require moneys in this way due to their status. >c) I have a Macintosh sitting on my desk that is owned by my employer. I >write that neat program and charge money for it and I get a significant amount >of money for it, is my employer entitled to some percentage of that money >because I used their machine for the development, even if the program was not >developed on the employers time? The employer did, after all, provide the >machine, the electricity to run the machine, the heat for the office that the >machine is in, etcetera, etcetera... In this case, they are entitled. However, this is usually company dependent. Here at GE, GE is entitled to anything that we write using company resources. They may choose to give you sole possession, in which case they have given up rights to it, but without explicit consent, they, in fact, have rights to it. The difference between (b) and (c) lies in the status of the machine. In (b), the machine is placed there for "the good of mankind", as a service. In a company, the machines are purchased to increase the productivity of an employee and hence, make the company money. They are not purchased to provide a service to the employee. "What about work I do off hours?" you ask? Well, it is the same thing. You are still using company resources and if you are not doing work for the company, you owe them at least part of the rewards you reap (it cost them money to keep that machine there and you using it). Jeffrey A. Hallett | ARPA: hallett@ge-crd.arpa Software Technology Program | UUCP: desdemona!hallett@steinmetz.uucp GE Corporate Research and Development | (518) 387-5654 +--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+ | Credo Quia Absurdum Est | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
dwb@apple.UUCP (David W. Berry) (01/29/88)
In article <3622@h.cc.purdue.edu> ac5@h.cc.purdue.edu.UUCP (Rex Bontrager) writes: >In article <7982@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU> merchant@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU (Peter Merchant) writes: >>c) I have a Macintosh sitting on my desk that is owned by my employer. I >>write that neat program and charge money for it and I get a significant amount >>of money for it, is my employer entitled to some percentage of that money >>because I used their machine for the development, even if the program was not >>developed on the employers time? The employer did, after all, provide the >>machine, the electricity to run the machine, the heat for the office that the >>machine is in, etcetera, etcetera... > >The discussion from point (b) probably applies here also. If your >employer is friendly and benevolent, they might allow you to have full >ownership; but that is rare. It is also rare for them to even allow >you to use their machines and maintain partial ownership. The usual >practice is the same as stated above: "If you used our resources, >then we FULLY own the creation." Note that this is also very dependent on the employer. At places which understand and to some extent, expect their employees to be writing software, I've found it works something like: a) Software written on their machines and/or time, they own fully, although they may be kind enough to waive that ownership after the fact. b) Software written on my machine and time, they either own outright (rarely) or have some rights to. Apple retains the "right to first refusal" on this stuff. In otherwords I have to take it to apple to see if they want to buy it before I can take it elsewheres. In case A, the default in lieu of some specific agreement to the contrary would seem to be that the company owns the stuff. In case b, the default would seem to be that I own the stuff. By the way, this whole discussion also applies to things like patentable inventions. -- David W. Berry dwb@well.uucp dwb@Delphi dwb@apple.com 973-5168@408.MaBell Disclaimer: Apple doesn't even know I have an opinion and certainly wouldn't want if they did.