Return to “General”

Post

Re: Dev funding

#16
JoshParnell wrote:And a gratuitous 3, since it relates to certain conversations in other threads...:

3. I could absolutely not afford to hire another developer(s) for any substantial amount of time. I work for LT for the cost of my living, meaning essentially free labor (with, you know, the promise of future riches :ghost:). Developers, on the other hand, are not cheap.
:o

Is it bad Netiquette to quote oneself from said thread :oops: ?
CSE wrote:...In short, and in my not so humble opinion: Josh is factually wrong to try to make this project alone. This is probably one of the main reason that he is loosing years of his youth to find a solution to industry-standard problems by trial-and-error. At the very least he should have a "board" of (experienced) people to discuss concept, plans, issues and schedule if he wants to implement alone. Such people are a dime a dozen on this forum who would willingly help for free, so cost and availability is not a factor.
And this statement remains valid even recognizing his huge talent :thumbup: - just nobody can do such project efficiently alone.
I should add that I am not counting myself in the experienced people in software development that could help as a first choice (while I do know about project management, it is in chemical industry and my programming days are more than a decade past :shh: ).
Image
Post

Re: Dev funding

#17
Even if the development contributions are free,
There are still some legal issues to think about. Eg: who owns the interlectual property legally when contributing. Everyone should be on the safe side.

Imagine you would have create the (quite simple) original models of Minecraft back in the days, and contributed them for free without any contract.
I would guess, that would result in some interesting legal battles.
Post

Re: Dev funding

#18
Damocles wrote:Even if the development contributions are free,
There are still some legal issues to think about. Eg: who owns the interlectual property legally when contributing. Everyone should be on the safe side.

Imagine you would have create the (quite simple) original models of Minecraft back in the days, and contributed them for free without any contract.
I would guess, that would result in some interesting legal battles.
Contributing to a project does not make you the legal owner of any part of the project or property.
Image
Post

Re: Dev funding

#20
Some statement I have found on that:

http://www.metrocorpcounsel.com/article ... -contracts
It is important to remember that, like all other authors (and absent contract language to the contrary), independent contractors own the copyright in all software and other works of authorship they create. The fact that a company pays for the work doesn't affect the independent contractor's ownership of the copyright. So if a company wants to own the copyright in the deliverables, the company must include language in the contract that alters this default rule and effectively transfers the copyright to the company.
Meaning, its probably not so clear cut who owns what in the end.
And that is what I refer to by "legal issues".
Post

Re: Dev funding

#22
Dinosawer wrote:Aye, there's a reason my work contract clearly states all code I produce at work is intellectual property of the company I work at.
Same for me. This is rather easy to solve...
Anyway I was not thinking of people contributing code at this point of the development (that would likely not be for free or at least not be without keeping some rights in case it becomes the next multi-million hit), but of people contributing expertize/discussion/ideas and a "formal" framework that forces the definition of timeline and progress (and may lead to a bi-weekly short report of the board-meeting, thus also fulfilling communication needs towards the backers). As this means perhaps 1 hour or 2 every 2 weeks, the effort is minimal and therefore can be "free".
Image
Post

Re: Dev funding

#23
CSE wrote:
Dinosawer wrote:Aye, there's a reason my work contract clearly states all code I produce at work is intellectual property of the company I work at.
Same for me. This is rather easy to solve...
Anyway I was not thinking of people contributing code at this point of the development (that would likely not be for free or at least not be without keeping some rights in case it becomes the next multi-million hit), but of people contributing expertize/discussion/ideas and a "formal" framework that forces the definition of timeline and progress (and may lead to a bi-weekly short report of the board-meeting, thus also fulfilling communication needs towards the backers). As this means perhaps 1 hour or 2 every 2 weeks, the effort is minimal and therefore can be "free".
In all honesty, it would not be possible to contribute code that would be in any way useful at this point, simply because the overall architecture and structure of the program are what needs to be defined to solve FPLT. You'd have to know the engine intimately (on the level of familiarity that Josh himself has) and to be familiar with what he's produced since, before you could reasonably add any value to it.

You *might* be able to implement some game functions using, e.g. LuaJIT, but on the understanding that you're only producing prototype code that will in all likelihood need to be completely re-written when the final solution is derived and all the access to APIs has settled down, etc.

CSE is completely right that the only genuinely useful thing any external dev could contribute at the moment is project management-based.
--
Mind The Gap
Post

Re: Dev funding

#24
Dinosawer wrote:Aye, there's a reason my work contract clearly states all code I produce at work is intellectual property of the company I work at.
I suppose it's not implicit that it would be under contract if it's volunteer work, I had just assumed it would've been. :P
Image
Post

Re: Dev funding

#25
Black--Snow wrote:
Dinosawer wrote:Aye, there's a reason my work contract clearly states all code I produce at work is intellectual property of the company I work at.
I suppose it's not implicit that it would be under contract if it's volunteer work, I had just assumed it would've been. :P
This is a great clause to abuse,

Write a virus, and it's technically the companies virus, then release it into the interwebs. :V

Code: Select all

<+BMRX> Silver Invokes Lewdly Verbose Experiences Readily With Absurd Rectal Expeditions
Image
Image
Post

Re: Dev funding

#26
Silverware wrote:
Black--Snow wrote:
Dinosawer wrote:Aye, there's a reason my work contract clearly states all code I produce at work is intellectual property of the company I work at.
I suppose it's not implicit that it would be under contract if it's volunteer work, I had just assumed it would've been. :P
This is a great clause to abuse,

Write a virus, and it's technically the companies virus, then release it into the interwebs. :V
The company may own it, but they didn't distribute or build it.

It's like stealing a gun, shooting somebody with it and returning it. You're criminally liable, not the gun owner, though it'd be a little harder to prove.
Image

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests

cron