Please don't change Beastie to another crap logo such as NetBSD!!!

[Anthony Atkielski]

Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:

> Their employers are paying them TO WORK on FreeBSD. They are not taking
> their code that they write for their employers and also sticking it in
> FreeBSD.  Big difference.

Not if their work consists of writing code.  In that case, the copyright
in the code belongs to their employer (in the U.S., and in a number of
other countries with similar provisions).

Under 17 USC 101:

"A 'work made for hire' is—

  (1) a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her
employment; or

   (2) a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a
contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or
other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a
compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for
a test, or as an atlas, if the parties expressly agree in a written
instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made
for hire. [...]"

Note that a "collective work" is generally a book or a movie, not a
computer operating system:

"A 'collective work' is a work, such as a periodical issue, anthology,
or encyclopedia, in which a number of contributions, constituting
separate and independent works in themselves, are assembled into a
collective whole."

"Computer program" is separately defined, which means that it is not a
collective work.

> In the first case, they are allowing it to happen and assign
> the copyrights as necessary.

Do they do this in writing before the code becomes a part of the
project?  Do they have a written agreement with their employees that
explicitly waives their work-for-hire interest in the copyright?

-- 
Anthony