[AccessD] Secured vs. Unsecured FEs

Kath,
 
In common-law countries (basically all countries where the Union Jack
flies or did fly), unless statutory law states otherwise, anything
produced under a  "for hire" contract is owned by who hired you.  While
anything you produce independently and then sell (license to use)
belongs to you.  Before you do anything rash, and since I am not
licensed to practice law in any English-speaking country, please check
with your local lawyer to see what the statutory and case laws are in
your jurisdiction.
 

Charles Wortz 
Software Development Division 
Texas Education Agency 
1701 N. Congress Ave 
Austin, TX 78701-1494 
512-463-9493 
CWortz at tea.state.tx.us 

-----Original Message-----
From: Software Design & Solutions Pty Ltd.
[mailto:SDSSoftware at Optusnet.com.au] 
Sent: Wednesday 2003 Apr 16 18:59
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Secured vs. Unsecured FEs


That's interesting Stephen, because my advice here (Australia) has been
that by default ownership rests with the developer, so I don't supply
the FE mdb in every case. It is a case by case situation for me.
 
Kath

	----- Original Message ----- 
	From: Stephen Bond <mailto:stephen at bondsoftware.co.nz>  
	To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com 
	Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 9:39 AM
	Subject: RE: [AccessD] Secured vs. Unsecured FEs

	William, do you ever assert ownership of the code at the
beginning of a contract? Down here, the law says it is the client's
unless asserted at the start of the contract, so I do.
	
	Your thoughts
	
	Stephen Bond
	
	

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://databaseadvisors.com/pipermail/accessd/attachments/20030417/1509dc06/attachment-0001.html>