Views on transferring code ownership
 

What are your views on transferring the code ownership to the client after the project is finished. I can see possible problems with this. First of all, the misconception that the client actually OWNS all of the code, since there may be third party applications in there.

But, also, the problem of self-made proprietary code that you have used on other projects, and will use in the future. What do you guys think?

if the code is your bread and butter dont do it. if its something u dont care about then do what u want. otherwise if your gonna either sell your code or pass it to another person then make your code impossible to decipher just like wordpress, and all those other open source companies have done with their codes.

I like that you have brought this up because it's an interesting topic. I am off to bed shortly so I will perhaps respond in more depth tomorrow.

However, as a programmer I see the code ownership as somewhat divided into two parts. That which belongs to the owner, such as the controllers, the views, CSS files, JavaScript files, etcetera. Although there are also those files which are core files. The nice little functions which you use time-and-time again in your projects, whether for your own projects or client projects.

The problem being that many clients will not understand that. I find it necessary to explain the theory behind all of that. The cost in which I quote clients automatically takes into consideration the constant re-usage of useful functionality. I would not dream of charging clients for the time to code a function which I already have in my possession. That is simply absurd and I would consider it very cheeky of me.

There have been instances where a client has complained because they've found the exact same code in another project that I've done for somebody else. Although that's very unlikely, it has happened in a handful of cases, especially if I've done more than one project for the same person. They will ask why they see the same functions. The re-usage is, as I say, naturally fine to me, and I see absolutely no problem in that.

As I'm sure we all know, that's not always the case with people who don't understand programming. They assume what they're paying for is code written from the ground upwards. That is the reason I find it necessary to explain beforehand. If the client chooses the option of code written from scratch, then I find that an absolutely crazy decision, and it goes against the whole concept of code re-usage, which is, I think, a common foundation in the programming scene. Though of course it's not limited to just the programming scene, designers, for one, re-use shapes time-and-time again.

As long as you give your clients the option, coupled with a description as to the reasons why, they will very much appreciate you explaining in advance, and will not cause any problems later on.

I would love to hear some more opinions on this. I must sleep now, but at least I have contributed to this, hopefully, fascinating discussion!
I would love to h

ear other peoples opinion too! ;)

Well, I totally agree with wildhoney. You should make these things clear before getting even started with the project. And in most cases the clients agree's then and actually understands - what he is paying for. What more is there to say? I personally think it's seldomly a good idea selling the ownership of a code. The programmer should own the code, the client just bought the usage of it. Just like it is done with music, movies, games or any other Application you buy.
Of course if he is willing to pay for it, why not?

The problem there is when you can encounter clients who doesn't even know how to spell O-W-N-E-R-S-H-I-P or I-N-T-E-L-L-E-C-T-U-A-L C-O-P-Y-R-I-G-H-T which most programmers deserve.