Intellectual Property? call for comments

Any comments, am I being unreasonable? At what point does translation become creation?

Background: I work for an engineering company designing a minor new addition to a refinery. We and the client have developed the logic to be implemented in SLC PLCs. The diagrams are very specific, including such detail as analog scaling, address locations to be added after programming, etc. The diagrams were used as part of documentation to clarify scope to a preferred programming and controls services contractor. Part of the scope included providing biweekly dumps of the developed Rockwell ladder logic code, so we could use the software to test and navigate, and assess progress. The contractor has responded with the statement that they never provide this because it is intellectual property with "special" libraries, etc. The have no problem with providing dumb PDF print-outs which at minimum are tedious to navigate.

The contractor sticks to this contention although we have clarified that no libraries or even subroutines will be applied, merely for simplicity of maintenance. Furthermore, code will be kept in ladder, and we have no interest in reusing the unique code of our logic. They as much expressed opinion that they were merely providing keyboarding, but still want client management to provide them with support for their untenable position that they do not have to provide what most integrators, and many machinery manufacturers will, thereby reinforcing a strategy to limit any percieved trespass into their exclusive territory.

I am not sure I understand. Does the contractor claim that the dump of the ladder logic code is the contractor's intellectual property?

First, if the engineering company and the client developed the logic and the dump is of that logic, then I would think that the intellectual property would belong to the engineering company and the client, not to the contractor. (I am not a lawyer, and this is a legal issue.)

Second, even if the intellectual property would belong to the contractor, the contract with the contractor could require that any intellectual property rights be transferred to the client and engineering company. It is very common for a contractor entering logic into a control system to, as part of the service, provide all intellectual property rights to the owner of the control system. This should be stated in the contract. For example, when I write an article for publication sometimes the terms state that the article is a "work made for hire" and therefore the publisher would retain ownership of the copyright as if the publisher were the author.

Do you have a contract with the contractor now? If not, perhaps you should look for a different contractor.

John Shaw Process Control Solutions

CSEguy wrote:

implemented in

expressed

percieved