Oh no, I never took it that way. In fact now that I think about the conversation with the individual. Ownership of the code was answered when I told him that he couldn't sell the code or sell anything created from parts of it.

To clear up something I said earlier. apparently I was wrong when I said that California dislikes verbal contracts. I had asked a lawyer friend of mine and he said I was quite wrong. California sees verbals as binding.

In my current situation. obfuscating the code in that sort of maner would work against me. I've pretty much figured that I will have to sit him down and discuss what he intends to do and be firm and diplomatic while going about it. After going back and looking at the documents I saw that he intends to incorporate the finished product into something he already has as a feature. This will pretty much change the entire product and make it somewhat different. We have already agreed that he can't sell the code or anything resulting from the addition of the code. Quite frankly I'm wondering if it will constitute a great loss if he puts it on one or two more sites.

BMaximus