Meh, that was some considerable time ago - and we just ended up with a kind of mini monarchy for a few years before reverting to the status quo (albeit with a few more constitutional restraints on the crown). Being a regicide has never been much of a badge of honour.
1649, to be exact. 127 years before the Americans decided to throw off the yoke of King George. However, keep in mind that the religious descendants of the movement that lopped off Charles' head were among the first colonists in what later became the United States. Then a few years later (in 1688) y'all had the Glorious Revolution, importing a foreign king to replace the one you didn't like, largely because he was too easy on Catholics.
And if you read the writings of some the the USA's leading revolutionaries, they thought they were honoring an English tradition resisting monarchs who had gotten too big for their britches.
For me, the tablet has little appeal. My portable device is a smart phone because it fits in my pocket. If I need more than that, I have a laptop that is little more trouble to carry than a tablet but has a much more capable UI and handy connectors for peripherals.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snowden/Dp03vGYD879 ---
404 Page not found
The page you're looking for is currently unavailable to view
We've been upgrading our site. It is possible that this page has been moved or renamed. You can use your browser's Back button to return to the previous page, go to the homepage, or you can browse or search for the information you're looking for.
If you think that you have reached this page due to an error on our part, please let us know.
What they're looking for is an objective third party to confirm what they know. Focus on what matters to management: cost, productivity and effectiveness of the department. Tell them that when you see this kind of pattern, it's caused by ineffective department management. Interview individual contributors and ask them how decisions are made in their department and what role their manager plays in operations and decision making. Also, ask the IT people what they're working on and how they're going about it and why. Then ask the same questions of the IT manager.
That didn't initially strike me but it is very ironic. And probably a very bad place to hang out. I'm sure China has people it would like to get back in exchange for Snowden.
A lot of TOP SECRET information is related to weapons development, military operations and foreign intelligence gathering. The first is necessary because you don't want the enemy to know what your present and future capabilities are or use your research to shortcut their own versions of what you are developing. The second is necessary because too much knowledge of your military operations gives current and potential enemies the drop on you. The last is necessary because if foreign governments know how you're getting your information on them, they'll stop up your sources or feed you bullshit through them.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snowden/Dp03vGYD879 ---
8979 signed on in two days.
Also, over 4000 for repeal of the PATRIOT act so far and over 2000 for the impeachment of Roger Vinson, whose signature authorized some ridiculously broad data collection orders. And 11825 for the resignation of President Obama. I mention this last because people have been calling for his head for years and it's not clear what issue is the biggest factor in people calling for his resignation.
so you cannot keep those files on computers hosted in a datacenter owned by somebody else, which is exactly what the enterprise offer from github ?
Again, it depends on WHO owns the code and what they say you can and can't do with it. This cavalier attitude regarding other peoples property that seems so common here is disturbing.
Actually most copyright legislation includes the moral right to be identified as the author of your work (and to not be identified as the author of something you didn't produce).
This applies to books, but software is explicitly excluded- so your book analogy is invalid.
Being identified as the author of something you didn't produce is fraud and possibly actionable as slander and libel. Those are other areas of law.
"massive amounts of food poisoning " What!?!? 70% of the people in your country get food poisoning daily?
1 in 6 americans get food poisoning annually. In Britain, about 5 million people annually get food poisoning. The population of Britain is about 63 million, or a rate of about 1 in 14.
I think a rate of over double in a country with similar eating habits, socioeconomic status, and climate, constitutes massive.
The British have a reputation for overcooking everything. Americans like rare meat. That may explain most of the difference right there.
FUCK OFF you whiny bastards, we HAVE TO HAVE power to power to run those latte makers and iToys you love to play with and we can't get shit built with you assholes cockblocking every damned thing we try to have! Sorry if that comes off a little harsh but if you have ever talked to one you'd know there is NO right answer, they will have an objection to building ANYTHING near them, you'd have to build everything in fricking space before they would be happy.
Not when they start thinking about the ground stations. Nobody wants to be near one of those.
However, in contradistinction to the burdens of the laws, the benefits of the laws only apply to those who exhibit LAWFUL presence in the territory.
The 4th Amendment, in particular, doesn't say that. There are good reasons why it doesn't. The founders didn't want, and I don't want the government engaging in search and seizure without probable cause AT ALL against anyone.
If those benefits apply in plenary to all individuals, such a voting and holding public office, how could we as Americans be sure that foreign influence is kept in check.
..Return to point. In every nation there are benefits that are enjoyed by all in a jurisdiction. H
Equal protection of the laws isn't one of those.
I'm FINE with the government enforcing the laws, including the laws regarding immigration. But if they want to search my or your or my neighbor's premises, person, papers or EMAIL, they can get a damn warrant.
No. This is not a matter of copyright.
Copyright is the right to copy. The former client owns the right to copy. This is about plagiarism. When you sell your book to a publisher you generally sell the copyright. You do not sell the right to have your name replaced on the cover.
I imagine with books, it's stated in the contract that the publisher can't alter the content of the work or attribute it to somebody other than the original author. I'd certainly want that in writing if I sold copyright to a book.
It's quite different. Copyright can be assigned to the author or to the payer in full ownership - depends on how the contract is written. In many places, if it's not otherwise described in the contract as a work-for-hire, then the copyright stays with the author. Employment contracts can have something to say about it as well.
The OP doesn't tell us how his contract is structured, so there's not too much we can say about it specifically. That means we can only really offer advice on how to ask nicely, which is always the preferable method anyway.
It also reminds me that we might want to get some testimonials now from clients who were happy with work we've done in the past. I've met some of these jagoff developers of the type the OP has encountered. In my ethics, every contributors' name stays on the project forever, even if his code has been rewritten because it was that old code that got you to the place you are now in the first place. Attribution begets reputation, which is essential for a well-functioning society.
Oh, one last thing OP - if the new people you're talking to are the type who won't believe you that you've done the project and are showing you.js source to "prove" that you're not being honest - run away. Fast. They're going to fuck you on the payment for the project as well. Take a job via a word-of-mouth reference.
If copyright law is anything like patent law
It's quite different. Copyright can be assigned to the author or to the payer in full ownership - depends on how the contract is written. In many places, if it's not otherwise described in the contract as a work-for-hire, then the copyright stays with the author. Employment contracts can have something to say about it as well.
The OP doesn't tell us how his contract is structured, so there's not too much we can say about it specifically. That means we can only really offer advice on how to ask nicely, which is always the preferable method anyway.
It also reminds me that we might want to get some testimonials now from clients who were happy with work we've done in the past. I've met some of these jagoff developers of the type the OP has encountered. In my ethics, every contributors' name stays on the project forever, even if his code has been rewritten because it was that old code that got you to the place you are now in the first place. Attribution begets reputation, which is essential for a well-functioning society.
Oh, one last thing OP - if the new people you're talking to are the type who won't believe you that you've done the project and are showing you.js source to "prove" that you're not being honest - run away. Fast. They're going to fuck you on the payment for the project as well. Take a job via a word-of-mouth reference.
I've been on the other side of the desk many times in interviews. I've seen a lot of people who were honest about their work and a lot who overstated what they had done. It's normal to spot check a person's claims before you hire them. That's what keeps the process somewhat honest.
IANAL, but in most such relationships and in the absence of an explicit agreement the courts seem to presume that whoever is paying for the work automatically becomes the holder of copyright, regardless of the authorship. If you own the copyright, you can use, modify and re-publish the work in its entirety or any portion of it. In such a case, it would be completely legal to re-publish it without attribution to its original creator. Once the code has been developed, the whole thing is out of your control. You have to have the agreement up-front.
If I were working in that field, I would propose that I develop the code they want, and propose, in decreasing order of preference (and increasing cost to the client):
that I develop the code and grant them unlimited nonexclusive license to use and copy it
that I develop the code under open-source licensing so that I retain origination and they effectively get license to use it and modify it however they choose
that I develop the code and they get copyright, but agree to maintain attribution to me perpetually in a way that can be verified externally
that they provide me with a physically signed document attributing the code to me and generally identifying its function and usefulness
Clients should be informed that the conditions under which the code is developed and your future rights to it or lack of them have prices because they could potentially be beneficial or damaging to your contracting business interests in the long run.
No, the client owns the code unless the original developer had an agreement with them that stated otherwise. They can do what they want with it, including removing credits to the original developer and crediting it to their new maintainer. To do so is unethical. IMO, but it isn't illegal.
How would that work? Your new prospective clients have no way of knowing you didn't just download somebody else's work and put your name on it. To show precedence, you would need client-verifiable dates on the files.
...and inform them of the unethical behavior of the new developer, the situation it put you in and how shocked you were to find that they had deprived you of the opportunity to take credit for your work. Somebody at that company hired you and knows what truly happened. Hopefully that person is in a position to put the situation right and give you the credit you are due.
That said, relying on your code being still accessible after you have left it for a while is not a situation you want to be in. Your former clients can take that code down and replace it any time they want, with anything they want. You should have checked to see the status of that code yourself shortly before you tried to present it as an example of your work.
Slashdot Mirror
Meh, that was some considerable time ago - and we just ended up with a kind of mini monarchy for a few years before reverting to the status quo (albeit with a few more constitutional restraints on the crown). Being a regicide has never been much of a badge of honour.
1649, to be exact. 127 years before the Americans decided to throw off the yoke of King George. However, keep in mind that the religious descendants of the movement that lopped off Charles' head were among the first colonists in what later became the United States. Then a few years later (in 1688) y'all had the Glorious Revolution, importing a foreign king to replace the one you didn't like, largely because he was too easy on Catholics.
And if you read the writings of some the the USA's leading revolutionaries, they thought they were honoring an English tradition resisting monarchs who had gotten too big for their britches.
One man's martyr is another's object lesson.
Latest count, 65,886 signatures.
For me, the tablet has little appeal. My portable device is a smart phone because it fits in my pocket. If I need more than that, I have a laptop that is little more trouble to carry than a tablet but has a much more capable UI and handy connectors for peripherals.
I don't want to be anywhere near those anchors... Think what happens when the cable snaps and the tether tries to wrap itself around the planet.
People (some of them) enjoy the adrenaline rush when they believe they are in control. When they are not in control, there is just the fear.
So why do people like roller coasters then? I just enjoy the butterflies in the stomach feeling as if I am on a really bumpy roller coaster.
They know the danger is an illusion.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snowden/Dp03vGYD879 --- 404 Page not found The page you're looking for is currently unavailable to view We've been upgrading our site. It is possible that this page has been moved or renamed. You can use your browser's Back button to return to the previous page, go to the homepage, or you can browse or search for the information you're looking for. If you think that you have reached this page due to an error on our part, please let us know.
Latest count is 34,647.
We have several going "scandals" right now. There's the wiretapping, the IRS, Benghazi, or the cumulative effects of all that plus all the older ones?
What they're looking for is an objective third party to confirm what they know. Focus on what matters to management: cost, productivity and effectiveness of the department. Tell them that when you see this kind of pattern, it's caused by ineffective department management. Interview individual contributors and ask them how decisions are made in their department and what role their manager plays in operations and decision making. Also, ask the IT people what they're working on and how they're going about it and why. Then ask the same questions of the IT manager.
That didn't initially strike me but it is very ironic. And probably a very bad place to hang out. I'm sure China has people it would like to get back in exchange for Snowden.
A lot of TOP SECRET information is related to weapons development, military operations and foreign intelligence gathering. The first is necessary because you don't want the enemy to know what your present and future capabilities are or use your research to shortcut their own versions of what you are developing. The second is necessary because too much knowledge of your military operations gives current and potential enemies the drop on you. The last is necessary because if foreign governments know how you're getting your information on them, they'll stop up your sources or feed you bullshit through them.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snowden/Dp03vGYD879 --- 8979 signed on in two days.
Also, over 4000 for repeal of the PATRIOT act so far and over 2000 for the impeachment of Roger Vinson, whose signature authorized some ridiculously broad data collection orders. And 11825 for the resignation of President Obama. I mention this last because people have been calling for his head for years and it's not clear what issue is the biggest factor in people calling for his resignation.
so you cannot keep those files on computers hosted in a datacenter owned by somebody else, which is exactly what the enterprise offer from github ?
Again, it depends on WHO owns the code and what they say you can and can't do with it. This cavalier attitude regarding other peoples property that seems so common here is disturbing.
Actually most copyright legislation includes the moral right to be identified as the author of your work (and to not be identified as the author of something you didn't produce).
This applies to books, but software is explicitly excluded- so your book analogy is invalid.
Being identified as the author of something you didn't produce is fraud and possibly actionable as slander and libel. Those are other areas of law.
"massive amounts of food poisoning " What!?!? 70% of the people in your country get food poisoning daily?
1 in 6 americans get food poisoning annually. In Britain, about 5 million people annually get food poisoning. The population of Britain is about 63 million, or a rate of about 1 in 14.
I think a rate of over double in a country with similar eating habits, socioeconomic status, and climate, constitutes massive.
The British have a reputation for overcooking everything. Americans like rare meat. That may explain most of the difference right there.
FUCK OFF you whiny bastards, we HAVE TO HAVE power to power to run those latte makers and iToys you love to play with and we can't get shit built with you assholes cockblocking every damned thing we try to have! Sorry if that comes off a little harsh but if you have ever talked to one you'd know there is NO right answer, they will have an objection to building ANYTHING near them, you'd have to build everything in fricking space before they would be happy.
Not when they start thinking about the ground stations. Nobody wants to be near one of those.
However, in contradistinction to the burdens of the laws, the benefits of the laws only apply to those who exhibit LAWFUL presence in the territory.
The 4th Amendment, in particular, doesn't say that. There are good reasons why it doesn't. The founders didn't want, and I don't want the government engaging in search and seizure without probable cause AT ALL against anyone.
If those benefits apply in plenary to all individuals, such a voting and holding public office, how could we as Americans be sure that foreign influence is kept in check.
..Return to point. In every nation there are benefits that are enjoyed by all in a jurisdiction. H
Equal protection of the laws isn't one of those.
I'm FINE with the government enforcing the laws, including the laws regarding immigration. But if they want to search my or your or my neighbor's premises, person, papers or EMAIL, they can get a damn warrant.
YOUR files, yes. Someone else's files? Not without their consent.
No. This is not a matter of copyright. Copyright is the right to copy. The former client owns the right to copy. This is about plagiarism. When you sell your book to a publisher you generally sell the copyright. You do not sell the right to have your name replaced on the cover.
I imagine with books, it's stated in the contract that the publisher can't alter the content of the work or attribute it to somebody other than the original author. I'd certainly want that in writing if I sold copyright to a book.
If copyright law is anything like patent law
It's quite different. Copyright can be assigned to the author or to the payer in full ownership - depends on how the contract is written. In many places, if it's not otherwise described in the contract as a work-for-hire, then the copyright stays with the author. Employment contracts can have something to say about it as well.
The OP doesn't tell us how his contract is structured, so there's not too much we can say about it specifically. That means we can only really offer advice on how to ask nicely, which is always the preferable method anyway.
It also reminds me that we might want to get some testimonials now from clients who were happy with work we've done in the past. I've met some of these jagoff developers of the type the OP has encountered. In my ethics, every contributors' name stays on the project forever, even if his code has been rewritten because it was that old code that got you to the place you are now in the first place. Attribution begets reputation, which is essential for a well-functioning society.
Oh, one last thing OP - if the new people you're talking to are the type who won't believe you that you've done the project and are showing you .js source to "prove" that you're not being honest - run away. Fast. They're going to fuck you on the payment for the project as well. Take a job via a word-of-mouth reference.
If copyright law is anything like patent law
It's quite different. Copyright can be assigned to the author or to the payer in full ownership - depends on how the contract is written. In many places, if it's not otherwise described in the contract as a work-for-hire, then the copyright stays with the author. Employment contracts can have something to say about it as well.
The OP doesn't tell us how his contract is structured, so there's not too much we can say about it specifically. That means we can only really offer advice on how to ask nicely, which is always the preferable method anyway.
It also reminds me that we might want to get some testimonials now from clients who were happy with work we've done in the past. I've met some of these jagoff developers of the type the OP has encountered. In my ethics, every contributors' name stays on the project forever, even if his code has been rewritten because it was that old code that got you to the place you are now in the first place. Attribution begets reputation, which is essential for a well-functioning society.
Oh, one last thing OP - if the new people you're talking to are the type who won't believe you that you've done the project and are showing you .js source to "prove" that you're not being honest - run away. Fast. They're going to fuck you on the payment for the project as well. Take a job via a word-of-mouth reference.
I've been on the other side of the desk many times in interviews. I've seen a lot of people who were honest about their work and a lot who overstated what they had done. It's normal to spot check a person's claims before you hire them. That's what keeps the process somewhat honest.
IANAL, but in most such relationships and in the absence of an explicit agreement the courts seem to presume that whoever is paying for the work automatically becomes the holder of copyright, regardless of the authorship. If you own the copyright, you can use, modify and re-publish the work in its entirety or any portion of it. In such a case, it would be completely legal to re-publish it without attribution to its original creator. Once the code has been developed, the whole thing is out of your control. You have to have the agreement up-front.
If I were working in that field, I would propose that I develop the code they want, and propose, in decreasing order of preference (and increasing cost to the client):
Clients should be informed that the conditions under which the code is developed and your future rights to it or lack of them have prices because they could potentially be beneficial or damaging to your contracting business interests in the long run.
you have commit dates, if the change copyright on your file is newer, there is your proof
you also have the commit history, better proof than anything, unless they suspect you faked hundreds of commits and bug fixes
That would work, but it would be unethical for a developer to commit his code to a publicly-accessible server without client permission to do so.
No, the client owns the code unless the original developer had an agreement with them that stated otherwise. They can do what they want with it, including removing credits to the original developer and crediting it to their new maintainer. To do so is unethical. IMO, but it isn't illegal.
How would that work? Your new prospective clients have no way of knowing you didn't just download somebody else's work and put your name on it. To show precedence, you would need client-verifiable dates on the files.
...and inform them of the unethical behavior of the new developer, the situation it put you in and how shocked you were to find that they had deprived you of the opportunity to take credit for your work. Somebody at that company hired you and knows what truly happened. Hopefully that person is in a position to put the situation right and give you the credit you are due.
That said, relying on your code being still accessible after you have left it for a while is not a situation you want to be in. Your former clients can take that code down and replace it any time they want, with anything they want. You should have checked to see the status of that code yourself shortly before you tried to present it as an example of your work.