Writing a Contract for GPL'd Code?

An anonymous reader wonders: "I am working as an independent developer for a client I have a long relationship with, and of whom I used to be an employee. I've made informal contracts in the past for development work, but this job is much more significant. Also, the client has gone to court over software development in the past; he was in the right to do so, but I need to cover myself. The product will be released under the (L)GPL and copyrighted by me, and the client will also be agreeing to open the license and give me the copyright on some code I previously developed. I plan to consult a lawyer, but I just want a little more direction before I start investing hours. Are there any resources I should know about, beyond what the FSF has to offer?"

Something doesn't sound right.

[EveryNickIsTaken]

Let me get this straight...

You're getting paid to write code for a client, who is then going to turn around and distribute it freely?

And after you're done with the project, he/she intends to give you ownership/copyright of prior code you've written?

Something sounds a bit fishy to me. Get a lawyer that specializes in cases like this.

Re:Something doesn't sound right.

[thegrassyknowl]

My memory is a little rusty (pun intended) but Rusty Russel did this with the Linux firewall code, did he not?

Re:Something doesn't sound right.

[IWannaBeAnAC]

This isn't fishy at all, it is common practice. There are many business that rely on just this - contracting work to add features or even develop projects from scratch under the GPL license. Cygnus (later bought out by redhat, unfortunately) is a famous example.

Make a contract based on functional results

[Qbertino]

I've done the exact same thing myself. Make a contract over the functionality and the service delivered that excludes code and implementation specs and agree verbally to GPL all parts exepct any CI and branding stuff the company uses. Think about a generic name for the GPL side of the project. Then anything that goes GPL is entirely in your hands and there's no need for a contract handling the GPL. It's a wonderfull foundation for working with larger partners. They don't have to pay further than needed, no need for both to fight wether they bought a result or some code and you don't need to feel ripped off as there's a funded GPL project out there with your name on it. It's a win-win situation.

Ask Eben Moglen

[MathFox]

or one of the other experts working for the Software Freedom Law Center [softwarefreedom.org].

As far as I see it is essential that write down that the application will be distributed under the GPL and that you'll get the copyrights on the finished work (if that's the deal.) Under the "work for hire" doctrine your employer normally gets the copyrights on your work.
Copyrights have to be transferred in writing, but a copyright transfer can be seen as payment. You could put something like: "Upon completion of the work [employer] will transfer the copyrights on ..." in your employment contract; but you should get another paper with the actual transfer.
I would not mind leaving copyrights with an employer, if I got full relicensing rights. What matters is that I can give permission to xxxBSD to use a BSD license for my code.

Disclaimer: IANAL, use this advice at your own risk. If it breaks, you may keep the pieces, etc. etc.
Remember, this is Slashdot.

The problem

[GodInHell]

Those who will give you advice here, probably aren't up to snuff on contract law.

Those who are up to snuff on contract law probably won't open themselves to liability by offering advice without the protection of a thorough interview, etc.

The best advice - get a lawyer, read everything twice - and.. just before you sign the contract.. ask the other party to certify that you've talked about and examined everything in the contract in the past - that they haven't added text or hidden anything from you.

Then, if they try to pull out a weird explanation in court, you have their word in front of the wittnesses to the contract to counter that weird interpretation.

-GiH