State Trooper Fights For His Source Code

BarneyRabble writes to tell us that a Wisconsin State Trooper is fighting to maintain control of the source code for a program he wrote that helps officers write traffic tickets electronically. Praised by the state just 18 months ago, Trooper David Meredith is now suing the head of patrol claiming that the state is trying to illegally seize the source that he had developed on his own time. From the article: "Meredith, of Oconto Falls, defied an order from his bosses to relinquish the source code - the heart of the program - in October and instead deposited it with Dane County Circuit Judge David T. Flanagan, pending a ruling on who should control it. The case centers on how the software was developed. Department of Transportation attorney Mike Kernats said the State Patrol - a division of DOT - provided Meredith with a computer to write the software and gave him time off patrol duties so he could do the work. But Meredith said in court filings that he spent hundreds of hours off duty working on it, developing it almost entirely on his own time. He noted that he never signed a software licensing agreement."

Time spent working on the project

[Anonymous Coward]

So this was a task he was given as part of his regular job.

That makes it pretty clear - the source code belongs to his employer.

The "hundreds of hours" spent working on it in his own time is a fancy way of saying he spent a lot of overtime working on the project in order to make it happen.

IF AND ONLY IF it was a task that was unrelated to his regular job (i.e. he had not been asked to write it at work) could it then be considered "his own" and not that of his employer.

If this decision were to go any other way then it would kill the ability of employers to claim unpaid overtime working on a project as work that they owned. This could have pretty far reaching consequenes (but is also a bit far fetched.)

If any /.'er thinks their employer is not entitled to rights for work done on work based projects outside of normal work hours then said /.'ers need to get a quick reality check.

RTFA?

[dctoastman]

After reading the article, it seems he didn't develop the software from scratch but instead modified an already existing package. So, in other words he is calling the Wisconsin police department thieves for not letting him steal someone else's work.

Standard Operating Procedure

[mpapet]

It is pretty much always the case, the gov't will own the source on this one for many reasons.

1. Body of Employee Law
Since most employer/employee law leaves no room for interpreting "spare time" vs. "work time" other than how much money you have to lawyer-up he'll lose on this one because he'll run out of money defending his position.

2. Body of State/Fed Law
I know the Feds have a policy whereby they own the source on things written for them. It would not surprise me to hear this used as the "authority" whereby the code is taken.

What's sad is the guy has committed career suicide at this point and, if he hasn't already blown a bunch of money lawyering-up for the pricipal/principal(sp?) that this is his code.

Developers please note: This kind of theft of useful code/ideas is SOP in public service. If you have a great idea, develop it on your own time and find a completely unrelated avenue to promoting it. GPL is one way to go about this.

Always clear this with your boss...

[Qubit]

The trooper's program is not FOSS, but I believe that the FSF's advice to Free Software developers who work for universities is appropriate:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/university.html [gnu.org]

Whatever you do, raise the issue early -- certainly before the program is half finished. At this point, the university still needs you, so you can play hardball: tell the administration you will finish the program, make it usable, if they have agreed in writing to make it free software...

Work out the arrangement with the sponsor first, then politely show the university administration that it is not open to renegotiation. They would rather have a contract to develop free software than no contract at all, so they will most likely go along.

I work for a university, and I have explicitly talked to both the senior programmer and to our boss about developing FOSS on my own time (Do it both in person and over email -- so you have a record of the conversation).
If you write computer code and want to make sure that your company/university does not try to take it from you, you need to have that conversation. Send an email today!

Re:He didn't sign any agreement...

[k12linux]

All sorts of problems with this reasoning:

1. He didn't write it from scratch. He took code given to WI from IA and modified it. Trying to sell it as his own would make him guilty of copyright violation.
2. If he doesn't acknowledge any kind of license then he has NO rights to use someone else's source code in "his" software.
3. There IS a license for the code he based his work on... the one from IA saying it couldn't be sold commercially. Either he accepts that or he has no right to make a derivative work out of it. Regardless, the license wasn't with him it was with the state.
4. It is not legal (in WI anyhow) to profit or operate a business using public assets (the PC he was given to use.) If he wanted to start his own software business he should have bought his own PC.... and written the code all from scratch.
5. And as others have mentioned, he was given time (and paid) to work on the software. If he needed more time he should have told someone. This code is "work for hire" programming and decidedly not his.

He MAY be able to recover pay (even overtime) if he can show his superiors knew or should have known about the time he spent on it. I can't see him getting anything else. He's never going to be making millions off that software.

He could always destroy the source code instead of giving it to the state... and risk being sent to jail for a computer crime.

It would belong to the employee

[Drakin020]

Work generated outside the scope of his job belongs to the employee. Unless he was told to program this it is under the ownership of the employee.

Works Made by Employees A work created by an employee within the scope of his or her employment is a work made for hire. The employer for whom the work is made is the "author" of the work for copyright purposes and is the owner of the work's copyright (unless the employee and employer have agreed otherwise).

Example: As part of his job, John, an employee of Big Co.'s training division, created a training film using Big Co.'s facilities. Even though John created the film, Big Co. is the author for copyright purposes. Big Co. owns the copyright in the film (unless John and Big Co. have agreed in a signed contract that John owns the copyright).

The work made for hire rule does not give employers ownership of works made by employees outside the scope of their employment.

Example: Darryl, an engineer at Productions, Inc., wrote the script for Productions' newest multimedia work on his own initiative on weekends. Because Darryl did not write the script within the scope of his employment, the work made for hire rule does not apply. If Productions wants ownership of the copyright in the script, it must get an "assignment" (discussed in "Assignments," later in this chapter) from Darryl.

Source: http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Jan/1/241478.html [findlaw.com]

Re:Resources

[stevew]

When you read the article - it says he did "almost" all the development on this own time. As soon as that "almost" creeps in there, the state can correctly argue that they paid for part of the development. That is the opening they need to gain at least partial ownership of the program. Because of that and the state providing him training to learn how to connect to the Tracs system - me thinks this isn't a slam dunk for the officer.

In CA (as has been mentioned MANY times before on slashdot) there is a specific law stating that what is developed by an employee on the employee's own time belongs to the employee as long as there was no company resources were used. The officer wouldn't be able to claim that as described by the officer even in a state that has such specific provisions in their own state codes.

I wish him luck - but I suspect the state is going to win this one.

A link and a headache

[w3woody]

I was about to Google the law in California, out of personal curiosity, as to the rules of ownership of a copyright for works produced under certain employment circumstances. I found a very good article on Ownership of Copyrights [findlaw.com], but sorting out who is right was giving me a headache.

I suspect the officer doesn't have a legal leg to stand on--but answering that question is going to require a peek at his employment contract, the work that was done, the other compensation or tools provided: in short, it's going to require lawyers and courts and judges to sort it out. Which is, sadly, the primary reason why we have lawyers, courts and judges.

Re:The code belongs to his employer.

[RightSaidFred99]

Huh? What are you gibber-jabbering about? Your employer pays you money, it's yours. Your employer allocates time from your workday, or lends you a computer to use to do development - that's his. Your point is nonsensical.

As for what you think, it's irrelevant. Case law disagrees with you.

Re:Head Asplode...

[Buran]

Sounds like all you see is "Low prices! Wow! Look at all the money I'm saving!!" Except... not really. And you're also causing harm to others. Why?

Have you ever paused to think about what Wal-Mart's business practices do to American businesses (I am guessing you are in the US since they do most of their business there)? Wal-Mart does a great job of driving wages down, and doesn't pay its employees anywhere near enough and overprices health care, thus causing a lot of Wal-Mart employees to use state-funded healthcare or just walk into emergency rooms -- which also is paid for from taxpayer funds?

That is why Wal-Mart is so reviled -- as it rightfully should be. Take a moment to ask why those prices are so low and think about what your supporting those unethical business practices is doing to your fellow citizens.