当你付款时，这是一套不同的规则 - 请在这个答案的评论中查找 Stephen C 和 outis。对于任何合法的事情，最安全的做法是征求专家（在本例中是律师）的意见。 （实际上总是一个好主意，水管坏了？打电话给水管工）
If nothing is stated by the school that you signed and agreed to...copyright defaults to you, the author.
When you're paid it's a different set of rules - Look in the comments of this answer for some excellent resources from Stephen C and outis. With anything legal it's safest to get an opinion from the experts, in this case a lawyer. (Always a good idea actually, water pipes broken? call a plumber)
This Policy is intended to embody the
spirit of academic tradition, which
provides copyright ownership to
faculty for their scholarly and
aesthetic copyrighted works, and is
otherwise consistent with the United
States Copyright Law, which provides
the University ownership of its
employment-related works
and such it is clarified to whom such policy applies, for example ucop.edu says:
This Policy applies to University
employees, students, and other persons
or entities using designated
University facilities
Now, regarding student work, it specifies as follows:
Ownership of copyrights to student
works shall reside with the
originator.
where originator is also clearly defined:
One who produces a work by his or her
own intellectual labor.
Given this example, I would ask your office of your university for presenting you with such policy document. If no document is available, I think you need to refer to your government law, but no policy shall mean copyright belongs inherently to you.
Do you think it's going to be a problem? What does the professor say? I'd just ask to see if it's going to be a problem before I got too worried about it. The university probably has someone you can ask too. Find that person and ask.
However, there's no contract where there is no exchange of value. They can't own it and also not give you something for it. When I worked at Universities, the ownership was always specified in my contract, whether the work belonged to the school, the government, the grant funder, etc.
Some of this might depend on state law, as well. There was a case in the Perl world where an employer asserted rights to open source code because New York law states that even work an employee does in the same field unrelated to his employment is also property of the employer.
If it really matters to you though, find a free law center near you and get an answer from a real lawyer.
Don't do this, even if you own the license, the school will accuse you of academic misconduct for providing answers to younger students, we had several cases like this at Ohio State.
Yes, I think that's stupid too, but instructors reuse course work for years and stuff like this would make it very hard for them to combat cheating. If you want to share reusable components, make sure it doesn't explicitly have the answers to any classwork.
Edit: If the program you wrote is interesting enough, and doesn't explicitly seem like classwork though, it's definitely worth it to talk to the professor, and maybe even work with him to write a professional journal article about it.
I've been reading Open Source Licensing: Software Freedom and Intellectual Property Law by Lawrence Rosen, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 2005. Very good book. I recommend it. He discusses mostly Copyright Law in the context of Software Development, talks briefly about Patents, and mentions Trademarks.
Copyright protection subsists ... in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression ... from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device ... ( 17 U.S.C. SS 102 ) ... In the case of a work made for hire, the employer or other person for whom the work was prepared is considered the author... ( 17 U.S.C. SS 201[b] ) (Rosen, p 19,20)
In your case Evan, as a student, I recommend taking your time to read this book. It even includes copies of and discusses the Licenses: BSD, MIT, Apache, Artistic, GPL, Mozilla, CPL, and the author's own OSL and AFL. Of course, since the book's publishing in 2005, there are newer versions of those licenses available online. The author recommends, and is a member of, www.opensource.org/.
However, in light of your discloser of solving a problem for class: Section 101 of the copyright law defines a "work made for hire" as: ... 2 a work specifically ordered or commissioned for use as: ... answer material for a test ...(http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf] April 2012, p2)
I suppose one could argue that you were ordered to create answer material for a test: but are you not the one who might be considered the employer? Maybe that would depend upon whether you attend a public or private school? I agree that it is just rude to publish answers to quizes/tests but I don't believe that is your intent. At this point I would recommend discussing it further with your professor and take his advice to further your development beyond the scope of just an answer for a test into a truly original work of authorship.
However, from what I believe, and perhaps I am slightly presumptuous: It's all yours to with it what you wish. Realize that, unless they agree to whichever license you propose, nobody may copy your work without infringing on your copyright - enforcing and proving that right requires a few extra steps as briefly described in the copyright.gov publication.
Good Luck Mr Evan. I was delighted and envious to hear about you wonderful summer: I hope, like you said, next summer will be even better. Intellectual property is a concept I often stumble over but I hope to be fearless moving forward as I continue to enlighten myself with such books.
If you wrote a paper for an English or history class, you'd own that, wouldn't you? It's your work, and if someone else copied it and turned it in, that would be plagiarism and presumably they'd fail the project at the very least.
If you were paid to write said code, whomever paid you owns the rights to the code. If you were not paid (like for a class project), you own all the rights to the code.
发布评论
评论（7）
如果学校没有声明您签署并同意...版权默认归您（作者）所有。
当你付款时，这是一套不同的规则 - 请在这个答案的评论中查找 Stephen C 和 outis。对于任何合法的事情，最安全的做法是征求专家（在本例中是律师）的意见。 （实际上总是一个好主意，水管坏了？打电话给水管工）
If nothing is stated by the school that you signed and agreed to...copyright defaults to you, the author.
When you're paid it's a different set of rules - Look in the comments of this answer for some excellent resources from Stephen C and outis. With anything legal it's safest to get an opinion from the experts, in this case a lawyer. (Always a good idea actually, water pipes broken? call a plumber)
IANAL，我认为应该在大学政策中具体规定。
例如，大学政策办公室 of 加州大学指定版权所有权政策
等明确了此类政策适用于谁，例如 ucop.edu 说：
现就学生工作规定如下：
其中发起人也被明确定义：
鉴于这个例子，我会要求你们大学的办公室向你们出示这样的政策文件。如果没有可用的文件，我认为您需要参考您的政府法律，但任何政策都不意味着版权固有地属于您。
IANAL, I would assume it should be specified in University policies.
For instance, University Policy Office of University of California specifies Copyright Ownership Policy
and such it is clarified to whom such policy applies, for example ucop.edu says:
Now, regarding student work, it specifies as follows:
where originator is also clearly defined:
Given this example, I would ask your office of your university for presenting you with such policy document. If no document is available, I think you need to refer to your government law, but no policy shall mean copyright belongs inherently to you.
在上交之前先获得许可。:)
您认为这会成为问题吗？教授怎么说？在我太担心之前，我只是想看看这是否会成为一个问题。大学里可能也有你可以询问的人。找到那个人并询问。
然而，不存在不进行价值交换的合同。他们不能拥有它，也不能给你一些东西。当我在大学工作时，所有权总是在我的合同中明确规定，作品是否属于学校、政府、资助者等。
其中一些也可能取决于州法律。在 Perl 世界中曾有一个案例，雇主声称拥有开源代码的权利，因为纽约法律规定，即使雇员在与其工作无关的同一领域从事的工作也是雇主的财产。
如果这对您来说真的很重要，请找到您附近的免费法律中心并从真正的律师那里获得答案。
License it before you turn it in. :)
Do you think it's going to be a problem? What does the professor say? I'd just ask to see if it's going to be a problem before I got too worried about it. The university probably has someone you can ask too. Find that person and ask.
However, there's no contract where there is no exchange of value. They can't own it and also not give you something for it. When I worked at Universities, the ownership was always specified in my contract, whether the work belonged to the school, the government, the grant funder, etc.
Some of this might depend on state law, as well. There was a case in the Perl world where an employer asserted rights to open source code because New York law states that even work an employee does in the same field unrelated to his employment is also property of the employer.
If it really matters to you though, find a free law center near you and get an answer from a real lawyer.
不要这样做，即使你拥有许可证，学校也会指控你为低年级学生提供答案的学术不端行为，我们在俄亥俄州立大学就发生过好几个这样的案例。
是的，我认为这也很愚蠢，但是教师多年来重复使用课程作业，这样的事情会让他们很难打击作弊行为。如果您想共享可重用组件，请确保它没有明确包含任何课堂作业的答案。
编辑：如果您编写的程序足够有趣，并且看起来不像课堂作业，那么与教授交谈绝对值得，甚至可能与他一起撰写专业期刊文章关于它。
Don't do this, even if you own the license, the school will accuse you of academic misconduct for providing answers to younger students, we had several cases like this at Ohio State.
Yes, I think that's stupid too, but instructors reuse course work for years and stuff like this would make it very hard for them to combat cheating. If you want to share reusable components, make sure it doesn't explicitly have the answers to any classwork.
Edit: If the program you wrote is interesting enough, and doesn't explicitly seem like classwork though, it's definitely worth it to talk to the professor, and maybe even work with him to write a professional journal article about it.
我一直在阅读劳伦斯·罗森 (Lawrence Rosen) 的《开源许可：软件自由和知识产权法》，新泽西州普伦蒂斯霍尔，2005 年。非常好的书。我推荐它。他主要讨论软件开发背景下的版权法，简要讨论专利，并提到商标。
版权保护存在于……固定在任何有形表达媒介中的原创作品中……可以直接或借助机器或设备从中感知、复制或以其他方式交流…… ( 17 USC SS 102 ) ...对于雇佣作品，雇主或为其准备作品的其他人被视为作者...( 17 USC SS 201[b] )（罗森，第 19,20 页）
就您的情况而言，埃文，作为一名学生，我建议您花时间阅读这本书。它甚至包括以下许可证的副本并对其进行了讨论：BSD、MIT、Apache、Artistic、GPL、Mozilla、CPL 以及作者自己的 OSL 和 AFL。当然，自从该书于 2005 年出版以来，这些许可证的更新版本可以在线获取。作者推荐 www.opensource.org/，并且是 www.opensource.org/ 的成员。
然而，根据您披露的课堂解决问题：版权法第 101 条将“雇佣作品”定义为： ... 2 特别订购或委托使用的作品： ...测试答题材料...(http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf] 2012 年 4 月，第 2 页)
我想有人可能会说你被命令为测试创建答题材料：但是您不是可能被视为雇主的人吗？也许这取决于您上的是公立学校还是私立学校？我同意发布测验/测试的答案是不礼貌的，但我不认为这是您的意图。在这一点上，我建议您与您的教授进一步讨论，并听取他的建议，以进一步发展您的发展，超越仅仅是测试答案的范围，成为真正原创的作者作品。
然而，据我所知，也许我有点自以为是：一切都是你的，随心所欲。请注意，除非他们同意您提出的任何许可，否则没有人可以在不侵犯您版权的情况下复制您的作品 - 执行和证明该权利需要一些额外的步骤，如copyright.gov出版物中简要描述的那样。
祝埃文先生好运。我很高兴也很羡慕你度过了美好的夏天：我希望，就像你说的，明年的夏天会更好。知识产权是一个我经常遇到的概念，但我希望在继续用这些书启发自己的同时，能够无所畏惧地前进。
I've been reading Open Source Licensing: Software Freedom and Intellectual Property Law by Lawrence Rosen, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 2005. Very good book. I recommend it. He discusses mostly Copyright Law in the context of Software Development, talks briefly about Patents, and mentions Trademarks.
Copyright protection subsists ... in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression ... from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device ... ( 17 U.S.C. SS 102 ) ... In the case of a work made for hire, the employer or other person for whom the work was prepared is considered the author... ( 17 U.S.C. SS 201[b] ) (Rosen, p 19,20)
In your case Evan, as a student, I recommend taking your time to read this book. It even includes copies of and discusses the Licenses: BSD, MIT, Apache, Artistic, GPL, Mozilla, CPL, and the author's own OSL and AFL. Of course, since the book's publishing in 2005, there are newer versions of those licenses available online. The author recommends, and is a member of, www.opensource.org/.
However, in light of your discloser of solving a problem for class: Section 101 of the copyright law defines a "work made for hire" as: ... 2 a work specifically ordered or commissioned for use as: ... answer material for a test ...(http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf] April 2012, p2)
I suppose one could argue that you were ordered to create answer material for a test: but are you not the one who might be considered the employer? Maybe that would depend upon whether you attend a public or private school? I agree that it is just rude to publish answers to quizes/tests but I don't believe that is your intent. At this point I would recommend discussing it further with your professor and take his advice to further your development beyond the scope of just an answer for a test into a truly original work of authorship.
However, from what I believe, and perhaps I am slightly presumptuous: It's all yours to with it what you wish. Realize that, unless they agree to whichever license you propose, nobody may copy your work without infringing on your copyright - enforcing and proving that right requires a few extra steps as briefly described in the copyright.gov publication.
Good Luck Mr Evan. I was delighted and envious to hear about you wonderful summer: I hope, like you said, next summer will be even better. Intellectual property is a concept I often stumble over but I hope to be fearless moving forward as I continue to enlighten myself with such books.
如果你为英语或历史课写了一篇论文，你就拥有它，不是吗？这是你的作品，如果其他人复制并上交，那就是抄袭，他们至少会导致项目失败。
If you wrote a paper for an English or history class, you'd own that, wouldn't you? It's your work, and if someone else copied it and turned it in, that would be plagiarism and presumably they'd fail the project at the very least.
如果您获得报酬来编写上述代码，则无论谁付钱给您，都拥有该代码的权利。如果您没有获得报酬（例如课程项目），则您拥有该代码的所有权利。
If you were paid to write said code, whomever paid you owns the rights to the code. If you were not paid (like for a class project), you own all the rights to the code.