Buy Existing Completed Orders
That is not practical. For one, it could violate copyrights or other agreements. You don't know what the conditions were agreed upon between the developer and customer.
Most of the time the developer holds the copyrights to the code, so it is usually the developer, and not the customer, that holds the comercial and distribution rights too.
It all depends on the conditions and agreements between the two original parties. So, it is not practical.
In Freelance rules there is nothing said about copyrights and source code files.
In my experience, source code almost always is given to the customer.
Also, the .ex file can be shared freely.
So, at the end of the day it is up to the customer, who paid for the job and his willingness to share / resell it.
No, that is no how copyright laws work. Just because the Freelance rules do not mention these laws does not excuse anyone from violating them, even if they are ignorant about those laws.
Even if a developer gives the source code to a customer, unless the customer has specifically agreed with the developer to buy the copyright, then the copyrights belongs to the developer.
Why do you think there is a "Copyright" line in the code filled with the developers name?
Even the distribution of the final executable has limitations under the copyright laws.
Most of the time both the customer and the developer are very lax about this things and ignore them. but when things go wrong and disputes arise, these laws come into effect, and if you are not informed about them you could face charges.
So, I suggest you do some research about copyright laws before being so lax about them.
No, that is no how copyright laws work. Just because the Freelance rules do not mention these laws does not excuse anyone from violating them, even if they are ignorant about those laws.
Even if a developer gives the source code to a customer, unless the customer has specifically agreed with the developer to buy the copyright, then the copyrights belongs to the developer.
Why do you think there is a "Copyright" line in the code filled with the developers name?
Even the distribution of the final executable has limitations under the copyright laws.
Most of the time both the customer and the developer are very lax about this things and ignore them. but when things go wrong and disputes arise, these laws come into effect, and if you are not informed about them you could face charges.
So, I suggest you do some research about copyright laws before being so lax about them.
I do not want to argue. But I am sure, that as a developer yourself, you understand that any copyright line in the source code file can be changed, and the code itself can be almost automatically, with some copy/paste/replace work made look unrecognisable. It does not make this legal though :). So, from Legal point of view you are right, but from practical view I think not.
Yes, and by changing the copyright line you are violating the law. It is illegal. It is a criminal offence!
Why do you think that there have been so many international lawsuits taken between companies like Microsoft, Apple, Google, Samsung, etc. — all due to code being illegally copied from other companies without consent?
So, given that it is illegal, if MetaQuotes were to create the conditions in the Freelance section for customers to interchange such files, the company would then be directly liable for facilitating such illegal activities. I am sure MetaQuotes does not want to end up in court because of that, so they are not going to publicly allow that.
Yes, and by changing the copyright line you are violating the law. It is illegal. It is a criminal offence!
Why do you think that there have been so many international lawsuits taken between companies like Microsoft, Apple, Google, Samsung, etc. — all due to code being illegally copied from other companies without consent?
So, given that it is illegal, if MetaQuotes were to create the conditions in the Freelance section for customers to interchange such files, the company would then be directly liable for facilitating such illegal activities. I am sure MetaQuotes does not want to end up in court because of that, so they are not going to publicly allow that.
Ok.
Situation - very popular. Even here in Freelance section.
One developer completes the order. Hands over to the customer the .ex file and .mq file. Later the customer wants some modifications made. But for some reason (there may be plenty) he has to hire ANOTHER DEVELOPER to make those modifications in the source code.
So, now 2 different developers put their hands on the same code. Who own the copyrights?
Developer 1, holds the rights to the original code and is the major copyright holder.
Developer 2, holds the rights to the modifications ONLY. However, by law, Developer 2 is in violation for making modifications to original code without consent from Developer 1.
That is why in the real world of software development, there are huge contracts signed between the software developer and customer that define all the rights and conditions, and licensing and distribution, which includes future situations, such as code modifications made by 3rd parties, etc. These contracts are huge and consist of many pages and are handled by the lawyers.
In the Freelance section, the people involved are supposed to be doing this all for "personal use only". The problem arises when they start using it for comercial purpose instead of personal use, thus violating the law. When they start using it for Market products, and such, then it leaves the "personal use" scenario and becomes comercial, which is considered illegal without the proper legal documentation between the developer and customer.
Obviously people still do it and ignore the law, because both sides look the other way and ignore it. But if one day, one of those parties decided to take action and take it court, the other side could suffer major consequences for being ignorant about these matters.
Developer 1, holds the rights to the original code and is the major copyright holder.
Developer 2, holds the rights to the modifications ONLY. However, by law, Developer 2 is in violation for making modifications to original code without consent from Developer 1.
That is why in the real world of software development, there are huge contracts signed between the software developer and customer that define all the rights and conditions, and licensing and distribution, which includes future situations, such as code modifications made by 3rd parties, etc. These contracts are huge and consist of many pages and are handled by the lawyers.
In the Freelance section, the people involved are supposed to be doing this all for "personal use only". The problem arises when they start using it for comercial purpose instead of personal use, thus violating the law. When they start using it for Market products, and such, then it leaves the "personal use" scenario and becomes comercial, which is considered illegal without the proper legal documentation between the developer and customer.
Obviously people still do it and ignore the law, because both sides look the other way and ignore it. But if one day, one of those parties decided to take action and take it court, the other side could suffer major consequences for being ignorant about these matters.
Thanks
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
You agree to website policy and terms of use
Hi
In the freelance section, there are many orders that have been completed that are pretty much duplicates of each other. Is there anyway of contacting the customer in these scenarios and purchasing their EA directly from them that is already completed so new customers dont have to go through the whole process of developing a new EA from scratch?