> company owns all of the technology and employs all of the personnel involved, no? No, he's a contractor. So what they own precisely should have been defined

> company owns all of the technology and employs all of the personnel involved, no? No, he's a contractor. So what they own precisely should have been defined in the consulting contract. It may have been perfectly legal for him to password protect the output, much like using an obsfucator - but the time-bomb stuff is fraud any way you cut it.