Warning, Ive just re-read this and it is a bit dull….but possibly important
I am currently designing something with and fpga (more soon) which has an architecture quite similar to the USRP motherboard. Whilst perusing the GNUradio repository, I came across the OpenBTS project, started by this chap, who is currently being sued by this chap. I found the case interesting because I am considering a career as freelance engineer (I believe the term consultant is often used here). I know relatively little about employment and licensing law, mainly because I am uninterested and found my law lectures very dull (I actually opted for that waste of time for once!). But I know that I don’t know and was happy to leave it at that.
In summary (I think) The Good guy David is developing a really cool cheap way of getting(possibly solar powered) GSM access into rural areas, particularly Africa . Using the USRP as a GSM/SIP gateway! He clearly knows his stuff. Is being sued by a previous user of his services, regarding alleged IP theft. It appears somewhat a case of sour grapes.
I ended up reading the whole 38 page response, I was really interested. Its crazy that someone can cause so much aggro and cost using the might of a “legal system” when the allegations(and frankly, apparently pathetic at that) are unproven and require great finances to simply match let alone defeat.
This lead me to think about how contracting of freelancers/consultant seems to be all about protecting the party purchasing services, rather than the party providing the service. This seems particularly true in the case of individuals.
In his blog David mentions going independent to avoid giving “someone else ownership of everything I do or think”. This lead me to wonder about having some sort of standard contract/document that is an accessory to freelancing situations that comes from the freelancers point of view. Providing some protection and ground rules. This hopefully might give security for the freelancer primarily and hence the other parties contracting them. By standardising this, it unifies the resources of many people in the same dilemma. Giving strength in numbers, a sort of communal open law resource.
This is a similar situation to discussions I have had recently regarding the legality of reverse engineering here in the UK. The current information suggests our quest borderline and the prescribed method is give it a go, see if you get sued. This is clearly unacceptable considering the potential pain/cost of going to court even if victorious. One can possibly employ a lawyer to decide if its legal, but they cost obscene amounts. This is something that many people would benefit from clarification and whilst I cannot afford one, there might be 99 other people prepared to stump up 1/100th of the cost.
So a shared law resource?? Useful? possible?
Ps, Please mentally insert appropriate mitigating words like “allegedly” anywhere I should have to avoid getting into trouble/annoying anyone.
PPS, go check out Kestrel and the openBTS situation, its cool and I wish them the very best with the case.
