4 ms·

I don't know much about what it's like to hire an independent contractor (i.e. how much oversight and control is typically practiced), but is it really possible

I don't know much about what it's like to hire an independent contractor (i.e. how much oversight and control is typically practiced), but is it really possible that Microsoft wouldn't have noticed how blatant the ripoff was before pushing the site live? To me, the "independent contractor" excuse is pretty lame, and seems pretty common (the fusiongarage guy's ripped-off article uses the same excuse, just off the top of my head). If you hired them to do a job under your name, then it's your responsibility to make sure that job meets your standards before publishing it under your brand.

robin_reala 17y ago
This happened to Microsoft recently with their Windows 7 USB/DVD Download tool: http://wudt.codeplex.com/ http://wudt.codeplex.com/ . They (apparently via a 3rd party development house) used GPL code from the ImageMaster project without releasing any of their sources. MS did the right thing in the end and released the code, but like you say, it shouldn’t happen in the first place. You should hold contractors to the same level of code quality that you’d expect from your employees.
- aaronblohowiak 17y ago
  "You should hold contractors to the same level of code quality that you’d expect from your employees." Copyright violation is orthogonal to code quality. The protections against this kind of behavior are usually legal, not procedural.
mwerty 17y ago
> but is it really possible that Microsoft wouldn't have noticed how blatant the ripoff was before pushing the site live? It's pretty likely actually. Doubtful a random person in ops knew what code was being pushed out (assuming that MS pushed it out).
- rbanffy 17y ago
  So, they don't do proper competitive analysis. I doubt it.
  - larsberg 17y ago
    For IP reasons, developers are prohibited from directly using competitive products. All market comparisons and analysis are done by third parties (at least a separate marketing organization and often paid external consultants) to avoid any chance of taint.
    - rbanffy 17y ago
      We can all see how well this prohibition worked...

robin_reala 17y ago

This happened to Microsoft recently with their Windows 7 USB/DVD Download tool: http://wudt.codeplex.com/ http://wudt.codeplex.com/ . They (apparently via a 3rd party development house) used GPL code from the ImageMaster project without releasing any of their sources. MS did the right thing in the end and released the code, but like you say, it shouldn’t happen in the first place. You should hold contractors to the same level of code quality that you’d expect from your employees.

aaronblohowiak 17y ago
"You should hold contractors to the same level of code quality that you’d expect from your employees." Copyright violation is orthogonal to code quality. The protections against this kind of behavior are usually legal, not procedural.

mwerty 17y ago

> but is it really possible that Microsoft wouldn't have noticed how blatant the ripoff was before pushing the site live? It's pretty likely actually. Doubtful a random person in ops knew what code was being pushed out (assuming that MS pushed it out).

rbanffy 17y ago
So, they don't do proper competitive analysis. I doubt it.
- larsberg 17y ago
  For IP reasons, developers are prohibited from directly using competitive products. All market comparisons and analysis are done by third parties (at least a separate marketing organization and often paid external consultants) to avoid any chance of taint.
  - rbanffy 17y ago
    We can all see how well this prohibition worked...