Another legal question

[thunderlizard]

I haven't had anything to do with the Computer Misuse Act for a long time but I remember it is nasty, brutish and short. It covers most things done to somebody else's computers without their consent, but I don't think it stops you from doing things on your own computers like controling access to your own FTP site.

"Any work I do belongs to them" is a good rule of thumb (even though it would be seen as madness in many creative professions) but you can only take it so far. If your business is data migration and you regularly use your own data migration tool to do it, it's impossible to give all your clients ownership and exclusive use of the IP in the tool (which incidentally would stop you from using it yourself in future).

[FiveTimes]

just leave it and move on.

[alreadypacked]

Thanks. I understand but I think perhaps people are already misconcepting here

i have "moved on" and know what went wrong. her attitude and overreactness. i did nothing at all.
im trying to "defend" myself from such threats - thats all I am asking for here and to see if i have the "law" somewhat to back me up, which im sure it does as there was no "breach" in anything except for the copyright stuff.

at the end of the day, if money is owed to me then that should be dealt with. its as simple as that

You have not "moved on" otherwise you would not be still talking in emotional terms. Only when you can talk about this in business terms, will you make the right decision.

Some of us have been there, and know the cost Vs return do not add up. The cheapest thing to do is walk away. Don't let your ego write cheques your Ltd. will have to cash.

[firehawk]

you have not understood. always jumping to conclusions on this forum with no logical and rationale explanation.

nevermind.

[Clippy]

you have not understood. always jumping to conclusions on this forum with no logical and rationale explanation.

nevermind.

So, the half a dozen posters who have replied have independently mis-understood or you have not explained yourself clearly enough? Which is more likely?

Apologies, but your posts in this thread seem to be displaying a victim mentality and those who do not agree with you or your view point are being accused of mis-understanding.

As AP has already said, re-assess the situation once you have stripped it of emotion and your next steps will be much clearer.

[Dearnla]

If you have a legal question, ask an IPR lawyer. The first thing they'll say is send us the contract you worked under. Presuming it then has IPR clauses that quite clearly spell out that your company (assuming you were engaged through a LtdCo.??) owns the IPR in any Developed Works and therefore grants them a Licence to use, then you have a leg to stand on.
If you were taken through an Agency contract and paid a daily/hourly rate, no legs are left to stand on. So give it up.

[Bunk]

no logical and rationale explanation

That's precisely the problem. You haven't explained the situation properly, only waffled on about being insulted and offended. You've been deliberately vague which would lead me to believe you're missing out a lot of the story to make it sound more convincing.

[MarillionFan]

That's precisely the problem. You haven't explained the situation properly, only waffled on about being insulted and offended. You've been deliberately vague which would lead me to believe you're missing out a lot of the story to make it sound more convincing.

To be fair. If he thinks he's been insulted by the client that's nothing to what will happen on here!

[Muttley08]

Your question isn't clear...

If it relates to IP of code developed, did you write it on T&M or Fixed Price - if the former I'd say you shouldn't morally have IP over the code (whether someone's agreed to it legally is a different matter).

If your question is about being insulted, or a petty argument about server config / hardening - I don't see what you're going on about...move on...they're small minded, get over it, onwards and upwards!

[Peoplesoft bloke]

I made a thread a few weeks ago about a client of mine whom I left as they were preventing me for doing certain jobs even though I was assigned them.

I own the copyright to the code I used. this was backed up by asking a question to a legal representative as well as here and also the BCS backs me up.

I blocked FTP access to the server for security measures and then over the past few weeks found out that they got someone else in to redevelop the code/website again (the stuff I was doing) and is now being hosted elsewhere.

interesting, the MD also insulted me before I left them because of her attitude and the things she said and completely misunderstood and misjudged something - thats why I left.

I then raised an invoice for transferring ownership. just got an email from her saying she isn't going to pay and said that I apperently commited a crime under the computer misuse act because I blocked access to the FTP *rolls eyes*

seriously? is this misuse? I don't think so at all. she didnt even request for the access to be enabled when she needed access to it at all..... so she was not co-operating at all!
if she requested it, then it would have been allowed access but at the same time, she did overreact on something and or misunderstood something to cause her to insult/offend me (sending an outlook meeting request) - but also, I own the copyright of the code.

so, what should I do and what can be done here?

OK I reckon I can answer this one. No it isn't misuse, and what is more you have an excellent case for huge damages* accruing from a range of causes. Most decent lawyers would be happy to take up your case for free just to add prestige to their professional standing. Please print off this thread and go to the nearest solicitors office immediately.

*I am not a lawyer