[ale] [WAY OT]Reverse Engineering MS Visual Basic Applications

[ChangingLINKS.com]

> If it were that easy, then all software would be written by other
> software.  If all you had to do to write a program is define the
> "rules", and there were no creative element, then another program would
> be able to churn out the desired program.  That is, after all, what
> computers do: they process input, according to some rules, and give a
> result.

You are correct. 
And, that is why some programming IS done by other programs.


> > Contrarily a programmer did not originate the idea, does not have any
> > risk, and probably would not code the project - IF he didn't get paid
> > upfront.
>
> I assume you're talking about contract programmers, and not programmers
> who are employees, or founders, or entrepeneurs.  

I was omitting "founders and entreprenuers" but not employees.

> I have, in fact,
> worked at a startup, where I had creative input into the design of the
> final product.  The founder of the company was also a programmer and the
> chief architect.  I also assumed considerable risk, much to my
> misfortune when the company went under.  I most certainly was not paid
> up front.

But, in this case, there was some agreement that you WOULD get compensated on 
the back end IF the project was successful. This case is not at issue.

> You certainly have a knack for pissing people off, Drew.  I don't know
> what kind of experiences you've had with programmers that you have such
> a preconceived notion.  While there are certainly programmers who do
> nothing but grunt work, there are plenty of programmers who do more than
> simply sit in a corner and bang out programs which simply process some
> input according to some "rules" that were given to them by someone else.

I am referring to the employee, or the contract programmer that does do the 
"grunt work." Some programmers write very valuable programs - look at Bill 
Gates for example.

> Unless it is explicitly stated otherwise in a contract signed by the
> entrepeneur and the programmer, or unless the programmer qualifies as a
> work-for-hire, then whoever wrote the code has the copyright.

Really? Then . . .
>
> > Do we try to look at the source code and figure out how many lines each
> > programmer wrote? What about the lines that one programmer wrote and
> > another modified? What if the entreprenuer did the debugging and actually
> > got the the program to work "right?" At what point does the programmer's
> > contribution get deminished enough until they have no ownership? What if
> > the program that is being written is bought by someone for $500 million -
> > how much cash does each programmer get? What about the programmer that I
> > hired to fix 2 bugs?

> I believe that "by default" the "intellectual property rights" should go
> to whoever wrote it.  If the entrepeneur truly does all the creative
> work, and defines all the rules, then there is no need to hire a
> programmer.

I think I understand where you are coming from. It seems like you are 
referencing types of programmers that I was excluding when I posted.
Course, I am not very clear about your opinion because you left the questions 
unanswered. (The carpenter example was left on the table as well. Should he 
retain copyright to the work he did on the addition - and get a cut when the 
house is resold to someone else?)

Let's isolate one question, Jason:
Who should retain "copyright" if one programmer writes some code and another 
modifies the code until it is almost completely different?

-- 
Wishing you Happiness, Joy and Laughter,
Drew Brown
http://www.ChangingLINKS.com