Like many other web developers I reuse code. Reusing existing code assets can reduce cost significantly and accelerate the speed of development. As developers we hardly ever look at an application as an off the shelf product and often put a lot more love and overtime into the project assuming that it can expanded upon it while adding some more weight to our personal arsenal and save time later. Developers know that there is much more involved than the time taken to write the code for the project, the application can often require years of experience and quite possibly other routines previously written when weighed against the time and budget. But to what end and to what extent do we reserve code before our clients no longer stands apart.
With that being considered, companies are often concerned about competitors getting the same application and at a fraction of the price, but writing code to leverage projects is very important to competitive developers. Is it any wonder why software contracts are so misleading for whomever signs them? It is always in the best interest for either party to own all the source code when the assumptions in opposition are almost always justified. No matter which side you stand on.
The Game Plan
I am going to write a series of posts on this. While I originally slated a week to do it I have found that that's crazy.
With no real deadline my goal is identify what's right and wrong with owning all the source code, and how to sell right solution with every one's best interest in mind perhaps with a shared source or GPL. Also, I want to unveil what the courts think and how the law determines ownership of source code.
In the end, I plan on finding a solid copyright lawyer to proof these entries at which time I will release a new revised version. That's been the biggest challenge since no lawyer will touch this with a ten foot pole as I am releasing this research to the public. Lawyers seem to make the most money digging people out of trouble and not keeping them from getting into it.