Intellectual property?

[hubrigant]

Would it be appropriate for there to be something in here about ownership of code when writing professionally? I don't know that it needs to be super-specific. It could be as simple as "I understand that the correct time to negotiate ownership of the code I produce is prior to engaging in a professional relationship, and that, if left unnegotiated, ownership of my code should be, as with any other work-product, owned by the (purchaser|payer|employer, not sure of the best term here)"

[bortzmeyer]

This certainly depends on local laws. in France, some rights belong to the author by default (even if nothing was formally negotiated).

[mo-g]

I would be strongly opposed to including copyright and patent elements to the oath. As @bortzmeyer points out, these are far from universal - and there are a lot of programmers who are actively opposed to them. (See EFF, et al.)

[hubrigant]

So, take out the bit about defaulting to the purchaser and leave it as:

I understand that the correct time to negotiate ownership of the code I produce is prior to engaging in a professional relationship, and that failing to do so then may leave ownership with the default provided by local/regional/national laws.

[pachunka]

I think ownership disputes are a nasty snag some programmers/clients fall into, but it seems to be covered by no.8 - "I will be diligent."

Inclduing this suggestion would be like saying "I understand the correct time to debug is before launching." - it's covered by "dilegence."

[hubrigant]

Since the full text of no. 8 is "I will be diligent and take pride in my work", I read it more as "I will make the best code I am capable of at the time" than "I will be careful in my work experience to ensure that proper legal procedures are followed".

[pachunka]

Well, the best code you're capable of at that time would be considerate of legal issues. The majority of code-files here on GitHub open with licensing information, for instance. Legality is a part of the process for code that goes out into the world.

Maybe what you're saying is that you reckoned diligence referred to the part where the code is being put together, tested, etc. But, somebody who ultimately published code that inadvertently violated another's copyright, for instance, would hardly be considered completely "diligent", even if their code was technically pristine.

It's as you said in the beginning: there's a time for taking care of each aspect - the coding itself, and any relevant licensing/negotiation/etc. But, I think it's fair to say that both aspects require diligence.

I admit it's counter-intuitive to me to "take pride" in being legally tidy, but hey, why not? ;)

[vassudanagunta]

The whole spirit of the oath is about giving, not taking. About sharing, not owning. It's about people, not transactions. It's about the common good, not personal or corporate interests.

#1 in the oath, I will respect the lessons learned by those who came before me, and will share what I learn with those to come, if anything argues for a deemphasis on ownership, and for recognition that we all stand on the shoulders of giants (or just all the regular people who created stuff that you are building off of, people you are not compensating).

I'm sure many libertarians and others who consider private property a fundamental and inalienable right will take offense if my point of view were incorporated in the Oath, resulting in Oath forking and polarization. I don't think we should go there. Society (including the programmer community) is not quite ready for this discussion, though I believe with all the inequality and concentration of wealth it is heading there one way or another.

So I recommend sticking to the only ownership the Oath currently talks about, and that is the user's ownership of their privacy. We have a long long way to go in that area alone. The software community has failed miserably in protecting people's privacy. Too many programmers collect huge salaries funded directly or indirectly by the selling or exploitation of private user data. Are the hundreds or thousands of programmers who star this Oath willing to follow this oath if it means quitting their current job or project and accepting lower income?

[mo-g]

Wrong button, sorry. ;)