Selling EA I asked developer to create

New comment
 
Can I sell the EA I asked the Developer to create for me and How?
 

Yes you can do that.

In order to do it you must first register as a seller here in MQL5.com.

https://www.mql5.com/en/users/captrader/seller

 
CapTrader: Can I sell the EA I asked the Developer to create for me and How?

Only if the developer specifically accepted that condition with you beforehand or has given you permission or license to distribute it commercially.

The developer/programmer/coder holds the copyright of their code and you can only use it for personal use only, unless the developer has given you authorisation to do otherwise.

I would suggest you study up on international copyright laws about freelance coding jobs. Here are a couple of links to start you off ...

Please note that laws change depending on the specific country, but since MetaQuotes is registered in the EU, you will probably have to abide by EU laws.

However, the best approach is for you to discuss the issue with a lawyer and obtain legally valid advice.

 
  • If no conditions for transferring exclusive rights to the program developed via the Freelance service are set in the requirements specification, all the exclusive rights to the ordered software belong to the Customer. In that case, the Developer can use the developed software for his or her own needs on the terms of a free and simple (non-exclusive) license within the entire duration of the exclusive right. ( Rules of Using the Freelance Service )

This is the final "contract" between the client and the developer irrespective of European, national or international laws.

  • Unlike employees who have a ‘contract of service’, freelancers work under a ‘contract for services’. Unless there is an explicit agreement to the contrary, the freelancer will retain copyright of anything that they produce – be it a piece of code from a developer, artwork from a designer or a blog post from a writer.  ( Freelancing and copyright: who legally owns what? | Twelve Oaks Software )

That is the point, that here, from the outset, the exact opposite has been agreed (all the exclusive rights to the ordered software belong to the Customer).

To make it clear to the OP... unless the client and developer agree otherwise (which is 99.99% of the time), the client can do whatever he wants with his software.

Edit: All of the above assuming it is using the Freelance section/service here at mql5.com. Which I assume it will be, since the OP isn't asking on Reddit... XD

Rules of Using the Freelance Service
Rules of Using the Freelance Service
  • www.mql5.com
Rules of Using the Freelance Service: general provisions, execution of orders, payments,
 
Make sure to upload the EA a few hours after it has been compiled by the developmer. Mql blocks "old" files
 
Eugen Funk #:
Make sure to upload the EA a few hours after it has been compiled by the developmer. Mql blocks "old" files
Shouldnt you receive the source as well as the customer of a freelance job?

What's the usual practice here? Do customers usually only get the binary?

Another question, I have in this context, if it is best practice to also hand the source. What if the developer is using a personal "standard library" would he be required to hand out that source as well? Or would it be enough to pass this part of code (iE as ex5-library) in binary?

And if it needs to be handed in source, how is the rights defined on that part of the work?


 
Dominik Christian Egert #:

What's the usual practice here? Do customers usually only get the binary?

Another question, I have in this context, if it is best practice to also hand the source. What if the developer is using a personal "standard library" would he be required to hand out that source as well? Or would it be enough to pass this part of code (iE as ex5-library) in binary?

Everything must be delivered at source. If the developer uses a personal library, that's their problem. The customer pays for the source of all work.

The purpose of a library is to make the developer's job easier, which does not exempt you from leaving the customer without the source code they are paying for just because you are wary of something you can avoid, as you can re-edit that library and leave only the essentials in it (it would make sense).

It's not about giving away extra work, but neither can you give the client a job and make them depend on you in the future with a "binary" that may eventually become obsolete and the client may not be able to modify it.

 
Miguel Angel Vico Alba #:

Everything must be delivered at source. If the developer uses a personal library that is his problem. The client pays for the source of all work.

I understand. Thank you.

It's arguably if the customer paying for >all work< as a personal standard library would not be part of the work, and reduce the labor time effectively by that contribution.

Just because of that, if MQ would provide a comprehensive std lib, it might have a totally different argument basis, but given that the customer paying for "all work" rather than for the "actual work" is what keeps me from doing freelance jobs in the first place.

On the other hand, I do understand that all customer requirements need to be part of the source code delivered.

Although a little a stretch, but if a customer is allowed to claim the complete source code, wouldn't that imply also the source of the terminal, and maybe even of the compiler...

Honestly, I didn't read through all of the freelance rules and agreements.
 
Dominik Christian Egert #:

I edited my reply.

Forum on trading, automated trading systems and testing trading strategies

Selling EA I asked developer to create

Miguel Angel Vico Alba, 2023.07.21 10:16

Everything must be delivered at source. If the developer uses a personal library, that's their problem. The customer pays for the source of all work.

The purpose of a library is to make the developer's job easier, which does not exempt you from leaving the customer without the source code they are paying for just because you are wary of something you can avoid, as you can re-edit that library and leave only the essentials in it (it would make sense).

It's not about giving away extra work, but neither can you give the client a job and make them depend on you in the future with a "binary" that may eventually become obsolete and the client may not be able to modify it.

 
Miguel Angel Vico Alba #:

Everything must be delivered at source. If the developer uses a personal library, that's their problem. The customer pays for the source of all work.

The purpose of a library is to make the developer's job easier, which does not exempt you from leaving the customer without the source code they are paying for just because you are wary of something you can avoid, as you can re-edit that library and leave only the essentials in it (it would make sense).

It's not about giving away extra work, but neither can you give the client a job and make them depend on you in the future with a "binary" that may eventually become obsolete and the client may not be able to modify it.

I don't think libraries and source code compilation works like you described in your last paragraph.

In fact, a binary compiled library is a working piece of software and can be compiled against over and over again.

Admitted, if MQ changed fundamental behaviour, like they have done in the past, the customer were stuck with a library that wyou ouldn't compile against anymore, but so would the source code. So at this point the customer is left with broken product anyways...

No, I cannot see this making sense. But a different aspect does make sense, and that is if the developer has bad intentions, implementing requirements into the library, which should be part of the source. And since the customer is most probably not able to distinguish such, he wouldn't know.
 
Miguel Angel Vico Alba #:

I edited my reply.

I noticed, see my reaction...
12
New comment