Custom payed modification are free in updated mod.

Can someone explain to me how it's possible that I payed for custom work in module
and now it's standerd in updated version in market!!
Should I have told the developer that he was not allowed to use it in standard mod b4 he did the work?

To be honest. Yes.

But the developer also should have brought it up. I rarely take custom requests, but when i do and want to include it in the next version i provide options which also determines how much i would charge for it. Examples.

1) How fast do you want it? If you can't wait for the developer to include it in the next version then expect to pay to have a rush job done.

2) Are you willing to allow it in the next version. I would not charge my normal hourly rate as i would expect to make up for it in additional sales.

3) If you want it exclusive to yourself, then you should state that. You would have to also expect to pay developer full hourly rates and perhaps additional costs that occur when a developer has to maintain updates on more than one version. This also is one of the reasons i do not offer custom versions of my mods as most people do not realize how difficult it can be to have to maintain updates for several custom versions.

It's the hourly rates that get most people. Most do not know how much developers earn per hour which can vary. And i am not referring to developers from India.

 here here, i don't take any work on hourly rates LOL

 and i think you should have at least raise the subject

Should I have told the developer that he was not allowed to use it in standard mod b4 he did the work?

Thanx for the response..

I don't mind that i paid for the work and that it's now standard. but i would be nice to see some credit as i gave him the ideas to build it. Anyways... hope that we all can help each other to build an even better Dolphin site and modules!

What was the contract you entered?  What is the industry standard on this?  You might be entitled to royalties on sales.  It is best to spell out that the code will belong to you; it is often understood even if not stated that the code belongs to you since you are paying to have it developed. 

Noted for future reference. That i should be specific.

However the norm falls to copywrite laws. And the fact is unless the coder signs a contract that specifically states that the right to the code is forfeited and turned over to the person paying the developer, then the developer actually owns and retains rights the code regardless of who is paying for it. Your paying the developer for his/her time. Not the code itself unless rights are specifically signed over by contract.

I have read somewhere that, unless you are employ of a company you are writing code for (which freelancing isn't), developer own the copyright unless its transferred on paper.

 EDIT: Nice timing Deano :P

 That is correct.

It all makes be a bit nervous thinking about me spending possibly $10K + on some custom modules I will need this year.  I wouldn't even know how to begin drawing up an international non disclosure, non compete agreement, or even if such a thing would be enforceable.  If a person wants to have a Dolphin site with features like no other, that has to be attainable somehow.

Thinking I will have to spend thousands on custom work, and then derivatives of that work start appearing in the market because I overlooked some wording in a contract, or because there's nothing I can do to stop the coder from doing that because he resides in a foreign country, is really quite troubling.

 Trust or lawyer!

Lawyer, unfortunately.

So what are we saying here... that from now on when we ask developers to build add ons or modify (there own)modules to client req. we have to let them sign an agreement saying that the client is the owner of the modified code and that it is not allowed to use it in further module updates. I think that no developer will agree to that and that people here will think twice to spend lots of money to modifications that can end up for the rest of the world to use.

That's what you must do if you want to make it legal. And i also believe you are wrong. To ask a developer to not use a custom designed modification or module in any other product is not to much to ask and i have agreed to those requests myself.

In your case it was just not discussed. It all boils down to trust.

I have only done 3 or 4 custom built modules for others myself, but the agreement i had with them was verbal. I agreed it would be used on their site only and i would not sell it in the market. I of course did not say the code was theirs and i would never say that, but i have kept all of my agreements and have never sold them to anyone else.

All i am saying is it has to be discussed. I don't think you would get a developer to agree to giving the code to you to use as you see fit, but exclusive use of the finished product is different and most developers would agree to those.

EDIT: I should point out i know i said Verbal, but actually via email. I don't like to talk to people on the phone anyway. The email communication also provides records which in my opinion is good enough. At least for me it is.

Yes you are right! it is a matter of trust and mutual understanding.
I'm happy with the results and that's all that matters for me!
Was just curious about the matter... so let's move on :-)

 Deano we always disagree on these subjects but let me see if I have this correct by your interpretation? You are saying if I hire you to write code for let's say a module enhancement you are trying to tell me that you own the copyright on the code I hired you to do and lined out what I wanted and paid you for? But when push comes to shove you own the code?  Really that is what you are saying? Please point me to any legal case that states that as I am fascinated by even the thought that that could be even remotely close to right.

Also his post is right on and needs clarification.  If I share industry secrets and then pay for those industry secretes to be put into a module you can bet without question they better not appear in the next phase of the module which I paid the developer(s) to build.  I further state I think you are wrong Deano in your thought process for custom work.  IMHO! 

http://jiplp.oxfordjournals.org/content/2/7/473.full.pdf?keytype=ref&ijkey=PUyOS40LmBKlBXU. 

Copyright And Licensing

When we create something — let’s say a photograph — we own the copyright, which is our exclusive right as the author to own that work. We control who else can use our work and in what manner. For example, I could allow someone to print my photograph or adapt it in a piece of art. Rather than establishing verbal agreements, I can distribute my work with a license that sets the guidelines for use. The things that are copyrighted are sometimes referred to as “intellectual property.”

Licenses are granted by an authority to allow a usage; in my case, the use and distribution of resources by the copyright owner (i.e. me). I may decide to offer my photograph for free or charge a price; either way, I can include a license to limit usage, and I maintain the copyright. Just because someone pays money doesn’t mean they have full control or rights to what they’re buying. Licenses can dictate the number or uses, the bounds of use and even the length of time until the license expires.

Moreover, under “work for hire,” the employer holds the copyright, not the author or creative; in many cases, this is a company (such as a creative agency) or its client (by contractual agreement). In such cases, the creator retains “moral rights” to their work, including the right of attribution. This is partly why published articles refer to the author, although moral rights can include anonymity.

Copyright laws are incredibly complex, but this should be a good start.

look how they saw this is SO complex but see work for hire! 

In my many readings of legal cases dealing with Real Estate one thing that always rings true is in the absence of an agreement the above as example only would be used to help structure the decision.  

So each would have to I give their best case on why not to do that... 

Here is a link to one. http://www.iplawforstartups.com/who-owns-the-ip-rights-to-custom-software/

I have found dozens of others most of which state the same thing and only a couple which state the person who hired the developer is the owner.

It's a touchy subject and i would rather not fight about it.

I saw that one as well. And it is only of only a few that state the opposite of what all the other i find are stating. I also belive it has a lot to do with the definition of employer. If i was to work for a company as an employee then under those conditions i would agree that the company owns the work.

Anyhow. I would rather not argue about such things.

Only discussing with you not picking a fight just really fascinated by the subject... 

I prefer to keep it simple, if client ask to keep it to only their site then its done.

Oh and I agree with deano on this topic

 Moreover, under “work for hire,” the employer holds the copyright, not the author or creative; in many cases, this is a company (such as a creative agency) or its client (by contractual agreement). In such cases, the creator retains “moral rights” to their work, including the right of attribution. This is partly why published articles refer to the author, although moral rights can include anonymity.

Just a thought maybe you want to state this is a "work for hire" for your entity like an LLC or company entity.  It's a good start and if you are the next famous owner of Houston LLC you would have a great start but these are just thoughts nothing more nothing less and in no way is even an attempt to offer legal advise...