21
License to ask for for custom software? (lemmy.world)
submitted 5 months ago by to c/programming@programming.dev
18 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Someone I know asked me for a favour. They made an agreement with a software firm for some custom software for basically inventory on a web interface, generic DB+webserver. They need me to do updates to it as a favour.

It's handoff time. The guys are giving him some trouble. I let them know if I need to do maintainence and whatnot, I need the source code. The guys are saying no. I recommended we use a licence that basically says "Buyer can modify the software and source code, but not distrobute it. Creator can distrobute the software and whatever they want".

I've looked around, and I saw recommendations for :

  • source code escrow
  • internal-use license
  • Modified Source Code License
  • custom Restricted Source Code License
  • internal modification only licence

anyone have recommendations of specific licences?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 5 months ago (6 children)

You're always gonna need to be ready or at least able to stop and ask yourself, were the favors that big, or did they just tell you they were? It's the middle of the weekend and you're fretting over this instead of spending your own time how you see fit or coding for profit.

A company that's asking you to figure this stuff out for them isn't necessarilly going to sign-off on anything too reasonable, but I'll agree my advice was more suited for after that happens.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 7 points 5 months ago* (5 children)

    Yes, the favours are/were that big. It's not a company, it's a person I know. I don't want to doxx myself by sharing my life state to this degree. You are giving largely sound career advice to other people, but I'm just asking about an appropriate software license to present to the ACQ, and you haven't given advice on that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    What the other person is saying is that the ACQ should be seeing a lawyer and making SWF pay for the lawyer to figure out a license.

    Your involvement is the maintenance part. You owe your buddy big time, that's fine, but from the sounds of it, you aren't a lawyer. Don't do lawyer stuff. Let the lawyers do their thing and you do your maintenance work.

    SWF should also have their lawyer draft a contract for your involvement which you will be able to sign to be able to do the work.

    We're telling you dude, cover your ass. You don't want to end up on the wrong side of a law suit just because you were doing your part.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    What the other person is saying is that the ACQ should be seeing a lawyer and making SWF pay for the lawyer to figure out a license.

    Yep, this is already happening. I am just trying to help ACQ understand that if they want me to do updates, I need source code, and to get source code, maybe they need to have a software licence, maybe something like X. I am asking this board for recommendations on what X could be.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    Gotcha, sorry didn't understand that. In the code that I've seen so far, there has been no license. Everything was handled in the contract. "Everything you touch is owned by us, all code you write for this project is owned by us, and if you leak it or show it to a third parry without our consent, we have you by the balls". Pretty much been my experience.

    Sometimes there's been a short header in every file "This code is copyrighted and owned by $Company".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (1 child)

    Any company that sent me this far-into the weeds for them ghosted me or replied with un-reasonable terms when I came up with something appropriate. Usually they replied with a whole boiler-plate they had on-hand, but apparently wanted to pretend it was a negotiation, until they didn't. A couple times, the legal department on the other end got shitty with everyone and tried to act like their company had never and would never interact with a contractor who hadn't already signed terms I found exploitative and walked-away from when they wouldn't budge.

    There are plenty of licenses out there that would work, but when you're two-companies removed from the legal offices of the company with the ultimate say, its never as simple as trusting your friend. That said, my limitted experiences with similar situations never involved an insider I was close with, so I mean it when I say I wish you the best of luck.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago

    There are plenty of licenses out there that would work

    I know there are plenty, that's why I'm asking for specific recommendations.

    That said, my limitted experiences with similar situations never involved an insider I was close with, so I mean it when I say I wish you the best of luck.

    thanks for the well wishes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent