How to identify which piece of software to choose for royalty -> Software IP definition is a contentious and thorny issue. This is something that does need to b

How to identify which piece of software to choose for royalty -> Software IP definition is a contentious and thorny issue. This is something that does need to be better defined and I agree with that part. However the car analogy is not correct. 'If you're getting paid a salary to create something the finished product is not yours. It belongs to the person or company that paid you to make it.' -> Yes, ownership lies with the employer. I am not talking about engineers "owning" the entire finished product, or even important components within within them; but that their efforts in developing these core parts should be acknowledged in terms of royalty payments other than salary (depending on usage of those components). Also note that I am talking about royalties for teams, not individuals. 'I can't imagine why building software for someone should be any different.' -> It depends on what kind of software you are building. if your team does build a software that makes a ton of money for your company, why shouldn't it be made part of those proceeds as well? In fields like hardware design which relies on IP based models, this way of compensation does exist (the EE times article). This is true for life-sciences too. In fact some EU countries also have laws for it.