Quote:
Originally Posted by Quoth
[...] But due to the intellectual and creative nature of programming it would be morally fairer to share the copyright and some small percentage of royalty, if applicable.
I'm baffled why you are so negatively against the idea. Even if more companies adopted it, or the laws were somehow changed (I can't see how), it would have no effect on your contract or income.
I am absolutely not proposing an either/or. I'm not proposing an end to programmers or writers for hire. I'm proposing that under EXISTING contracts of employment that the in reality shared nature of the creative works should be recognised.
It's not some sort of socialist or Free Software manifesto.
|
Curiously enough, this demonstrates a similarity to the other contentious IP problem related (particularly) to software: patents.
Just imagine a project had to track every function (or line of code?) for its impact on IP: patents to be paid, patents to be applied for, shares of copyright to be allocated to the 50 programmers who have had a hand in maintaining that function over the last 20 years. It would be a nightmare! The practicalities of it negate the need to discuss the politics of it. On the plus side, it might be a way to drive more programmers over to open-source.
