Need some quick input from you kind Sup Forumsents

Need some quick input from you kind Sup Forumsents

If I am being contracted to provide a company with a specific piece of software, does that include the source code? What is the standard for this sort of thing? It's being provided to non-software people who don't care what language it's in or how it's written, so long as it works. If they end up asking for the source code as well, how do I explain that it and a deployed piece of software are separate entities? So far it hasn't come up but I want to avoid any problems.

Source code is extremely valuable and this is a major project for me. They've simply defined their need as "a Windows-compatible piece of software".

Really appreciate any input.

there's not much reason to give a fuck, if they ask for the source code it's not like they're preventing you from using it in another project, they'd never know

My main concern is that the code is more valuable than the deployed product. I'm not just going to hand it over since it isn't specifically defined in the contract, but at the same time these people know nothing about software and it could be a mess. I can't just not give a fuck about giving it away.

It might be best to get legal advice, but unless your contact says you must provide all of the work you produce, relating to the job, to your contractor you might be able to keep the source separate. The contract will probably explicitly say that you must give up the source and executable, but if it doesn't say that it will probably say something similar

>My main concern is that the code is more valuable than the deployed product
why is this of any concern to you? you're contracted to do your work for your pay, it's not like it's going to change anything? and if the contract doesn't specifiy source code and they don't know what code is it's unlikely they'll ask for the source code

Contract only asks for a piece of Windows-compatible software. Never once mentions the code. But again, these are non software people and it may turn into an interpretation battle and potentially a legal debate.

Simple question: Can it be undeniably proven that source code is software?

Charge extra for the source

The closest thing they said to asking for the source code was "We'd like to be able to expand on this in the future" which is hugely open to interpretation. Even then, that was verbally and never in a legal document.

Is that something I can do if this were to go to court? Can I prove absolutely that source isn't required?

that would mean giving them source code then, but again I'm not sure why you care, do you want to hold it ransom because it isn't in your contract and demand more money for it? that's a great way to build a bad reputation for yourself

The contract I signed does not at all specify the necessity for being able to expand on the product. It was only ever said verbally.

This is gonna be a shitshow isnt it

what do you lose by giving them the source code, short of being able to demand more money from them because it wasn't in your contract?

I'm being a professional and want to provide exactly what is asked for and nothing else, especially not something more valuable than the product itself (which is already worth a considerable amount)

I mean I dont want to be a dick but I dont want to do anything stupid either. I figure handing over the source for free can only hurt me, but then I'm the asshole who they think wants to snag extra money when in reality it's a matter of personal and professional integrity.

it's got nothing to do with a 'professional integrity', it sounds more like you're being a greedy dick
if you want to be a professional with integrity you can give them the source code if they want to expand on it, even though they didn't explicitly ask for it because they dont understand what it is
or you can withhold it, piss them off, maybe they'll even take you to court, depending on the wording of your contract you'll probably get away with it, if pissing off your clients is your idea of professional

You are being a dick and sharing the source code isn't going to hurt you. They said they wanted the ability to extend it in the future - that means they'll need the source code. It would be slimy to refuse to show them the code they're supposed to be running in production just because it's not explicitly laid out in the contract even though you know that's what they mean.

>handing over the source for free can only hurt me

Oh, grow the fuck up. They want to expand in the future, and unless you want to work on this project forever, they'll need the source code.

Make a plugin system and provide a SDK for it (or use a existing one.). Easy.

The main point I was making on integrity is that I've done projects where I've provided it and specifically been told it isn't needed, but don't know what to do here when it's so ambiguous.

I really don't mean to be greedy here, I just don't know what's absolutely correct. As a developer, my own code is very important to me and I know it's very valuable. I've always charges clients extra for source and they've always understood. But with these people I have no clue.

>it's got nothing to do with a 'professional integrity', it sounds more like you're being a greedy dick

Why? The source code could be considered a trade secret, why the hell should someone give it away for free.
An no, Stallman never had to code for a living, his arguments are full of shit.

>As a developer, my own code is very important to me and I know it's very valuable
You're not giving it away. Nobody is realistically going to stop you reusing it once you've given it to them. You talk about being a professional, this attitude is absolutely childish. Provide it if it's needed. If it's not needed, don't. If they say they want to expand it without you around, that obviously means they need the source. You can try to charge extra but they'll probably think it's a shitty thing to do since they don't understand what source code is and probably think they paid for the whole thing anyway.

why? because you're not losing anything by giving it to them except the ability to demand more money and really piss them off. No, your source code is not a trade secret, you're probably writing the same object-oritented business applications everyone else is

Expanding on it was mentioned, but at the same time so was keeping me on the project after this contract ends. I feel they're linked, no? I'd gladly provide the code if it meant more work with them, but my concern here is would I be making a mistake by handing it over as soon as the product is finished?

>No, your source code is not a trade secret

Speak for yourself. There is a reason why people don't give away their sorce code willy nilly.
Give away your source code == give away your work.

OP here, im not that user. I didn't suggest it was a trade secret, but I appreciate him at least attempting to defend that end of things.

>I feel they're linked, no?
No!

Verbatim: "Ee'd like to be able to expand on this project and continue working with you"
I'd train people, work on it more, and of course fully disclose the code so long as it's being done in a way that's fair for both parties.

I don't understand why people are acting like the source to proprietary software utilized by a million dollar company is freebie.

>There is a reason why people don't give away their sorce code willy nilly.
yeah, narcissism, most code people write is barely of any use to anyone outside the person it's written for

in that case I see your dilemma. It's more like a bargaining chip. If you give it to them without being asked it makes it easier for them to cut you loose. I'd just not give it to them unless they asked you for it

>yeah, narcissism, most code people write is barely of any use to anyone outside the person it's written for

t. java shop coder

>would I be making a mistake by handing it over as soon as the product is finished?
No. You'd still be the first person they'd go to for extending it. If you're not available, they'll be able to hire someone else. They'd feel that you screwed them over if they found out later that they aren't able to extend it because you didn't give them the means to do so.

Yep, sounds like you're basically screwing them over. If your code really does contain some rare trade secret, and I'd be shocked if it legitimately did, you should charge accordingly upfront rather than try and milk them for it afterward.

OP here

Thanks for everybody's feedback, both the polite ones and not so polite ones.

Looks like I'll just not bring it up, casually explain at the launch that I'm obviously the only one who can train others in it, and they'll pretty much definitely keep me on. If not, then I'll give it to them anyway to avoid an absolute shitstorm and hope that they come asking for my help if their developers need training or anything.

I was never trying to be greedy, I was trying to do everything I could to keep a contract going. Sorry if wanting to stay employed is greedy. The amount for this contract is not the issue, it's making sure I keep working. If providing the source works me directly into more business with them, then I don't see any harm in politely explaining how much they'll need more for at least a little while longer.

Check your contract again but almost always the source code is considered to be owned by the client.

It is not YOUR source, that's the first thing to understand.

It would be different if you were selling them a product, but you are being hired to create something for your client.

Again, check your contract but I'd expect you'd be sued if you tried to repackage this and sell it to someone else.

Is this a web app?

the way you were talking about it initially makes it sound like you were trying to be greedy, but I can understand wanting to be kept on when it finishes

Can't provide any details on any aspect of it, even anonymously.

No one likes Jews for a reason user.

Be careful. In countries you automatically grant your employer exclusive copyright to own your source code created during working time.

Of course you have to give them the source code..

What if they plan to add new features in the future? Are they bound to a certain develloper for eternity? Do they have to build it from the scratch again?

I'd sue the ass out of someone who would keep his source code.

BTW
>Source code is extremely valuable

Not that valuable. Source code is extremely customized and unless you have a battle-proven highly customizable system like the complete SAP system, no one will care about your "precious" source code..

I seriously doubt your code is of any value m8
Software is always shit and yours is not different, the person that's going to expand on it will probably rewrite a considerable part of it anyway because it's probably unreadable garbage
You are just a greedy autistic

this c'mon OP

typical freetard mentality

If you were hired to do this job, then source code belongs to them.
If you are selling them a licence to use your software, source is yours.