Perhaps I didn't phrase my question well. From reading posts by others, this seemed to be an issue of great interest to most professional Perl programmers. From reading those same posts most monks are unable/unwilling to hire a lawyer for each project.

One thing has me curious. When many others, including merlyn, have posted many times about problems they had because they failed to obtain an adequate contract for a Perl programming (or Perl book writing) project, no one said anything about it not being Perl related, marked it "considered", or talked about it being deleted. Indeed there were a couple of different very active threads here when one of our most beloved members, who has contributed much to Perl Monks and CPAN over the years had to stop contributing modules or posting code because he signed a bad contract. I'm thinking also about merlyn's post where he lost many thousands of dollars because he failed to have an adequate contract, which appeared to be of much interest to many monks.

That just leaves me asking what exacly the criteria are. Would these previous posts be "Perl related" because they discussed a problem, rather than an attempt at a solution? Is reporting problems more valuable than seeking solutions? Or does the name of the person posting determine whether or not it's "Perl related", such that of two posts on the same topic one may be "Perl related" because it was posted by a recognizable nick, while if the same post was made by a less recognizable nick it's no longer "Perl related"?

Agreed, many of the same issues apply when programming in other languages. Some of the contract issues are unique to perl, such as the copyright clauses of a contract for a project that includes/makes use of modules or libraries under the Perl Artistic License. Similarly, any of the algorithms discussed on this site could also be coded in some other language, but here you'll find the best ways to implement them in Perl. Perhaps if this is not an appropriate place to discuss the business and legal considerations faced by every professional Perl programmer someone might be able to suggest what an appropriate forum WOULD be?

Lastly, I must ask those who feel that the legal and contractual issues that apply to every professional Perl project are not Perl related if I were to hire a IP lawyer to write an excellent Perl programming contract form that could be used by any monk who wished to use it, would that be Perl related?

I think you are missing the point here, sure there may or may not be some merit in discussing contractual issues as they relate to those who describe themselves as "Perl programmers" (and I am sure there are as many opinions on this as there subscribers to perlmonks). However you specifically asked for something substantive (i.e. a boilerplate contract) and this is something that you really do need to engage a lawyer to get help with rather than ask here, even if your red herring about the IP and copyright issues were pertinent you would still need a lawyer to interpret those as regards the law as it prevails in the country that you are working. Even if someone were to provide what you are asking for, you don't state where you intend to work and under what jurisdiction the contract would fall - you might find yourself using a contract that has no force or even be potentially illegal under the law of the land where you are working: again you would require a lawyer to advise you on this. And what happens if you do use a contract devised from one you are given here and you end up not getting paid or getting sued or worse, what are you going to do then? Ask for you money back?, sue the monk who posted it or The Perl Foundation? At the very least if you take legal advice from a legal professional and it is wrong then you have some recourse in most countries.

Believe it or not I am trying to give you advice that is in your own best interest here, but you seem to think the opposite for some reason.

/J\

raymor in "Re^2: Custom perl programming contract" said:

When many others, including merlyn, have posted many times about problems they had because they failed to obtain an adequate contract for a Perl programming (or Perl book writing) project

Just for the record, I'm challenging the inclusion of my name in this statement. If you have evidence of the particular phrase you've seen here (or perhaps in some other public forum) that you think supports your statement, I'd like to see it. I do believe this statement to be false as far as including my name, however, and would request that you withdraw your claim for lack of evidence.

I don't suspect any malice here; perhaps just a misunderstanding. But in this area, my reputation is important.

-- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker
Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.

---

update: After reviewing private comments from raymor, I see that he was confused about a prior public dispute I had, thinking it was a contractual issue, when in fact it was an issue over an understanding that was not contractually related. Thus, his comments that led me to write the first part of this message were not intentionally incorrect. However, for the record, I'll leave this node as it stands, and declare the matter resolved to my satisfaction.

My apologies for including your name in my post. Your reputaion is obviously important to you and I could have just as easily pointed to any of dozens of other notes here about problems people have had contributing open source code or documentation or using open source code in professional Perl projects.

As to the truth or falsity of my statement that you've had some concerns that perhaps could have been avoided with better contracts I thought that my reference to Perl book writing would be a clear enough hint that you and others who have been around a while would know what I was referring to, if they had the inclination to think about it. That situation happened 5 years ago now, though, and I was out of line to bring it up and open up old wounds.

Obviously I don't know the details of your personal business dealings either, so I shouldn't have brought it up in this context. Rather than posting a link to an old thread that you might rather not have linked to, I'll just make the statement that the situation I was referring to was one in which merlyn appeared to get the short end. That is to say it wasn't a situation where merlyn took advantage of anyone else, but possibly the opposite. I'm sending you a link to the thread privately should you choose to post it.

It was me who considered your node not beeing Perl related, this decision had nothing to do with your nick. In fact I did not look it up before my consideration.
If I had the wisdom your node fits into Meditations, I would have considered it to be moved. Thank crunchy itīs Friday feasible to unconsider nodes, and castaway in her great wisdom has done so.
Take my apoligies.


holli, /regexed monk/