Who Owns the Code? CE Industry’s Dirty Little Secret

Quoting Mike:

“the reality is simnple, 90% of your customers are unhappy and too embarassed to tell the world they were let down, versus bragging about having a crestron system that does nothing but irritate them”

Keywords in Mike’s response = unhappy

Quoting Mike:

“the reality is simnple, 90% of your customers are unhappy and too embarassed to tell the world they were let down, versus bragging about having a crestron system that does nothing but irritate them”

Keywords in Mike’s response = Let down

Result = Mike tells his freinds

No amount of justification or education will overcome the shared market perspectives of Mike and his freinds.

I’d like to say that I’ve taken over several Crestron jobs where the customer had the code, and never, not once was there anything useful in it, other than simple clerical information that could have been gleaned in other ways. I always had to completely re-write from scratch. I hereby promise that if we’re ever going out of business, I’ll mail you a jump drive with all of our code on it. If I’m out of business, it doesn’t do me any good anyway…

First off, amid some of the rock throwing, remember that in many cases involving insolvency, things sometimes escalate quickly and all too often there will be unintentional victims who suffer.  Good people, fellow colleagues and friends, as well as the less upstanding sometimes fall on hard times and can no longer control what happens to their past and current customers.

The real issue here is that customers of dissolved firms can be left out in the cold.  It happens repeatedly and not exclusively to just our industry.  Julie’s example happens to be a high-profile case but there are others out there to be certain.  And when it happens, many customers are affected and not just the ones whom have finished systems.

And while similarities exist between integrators that cease operations, I suggest each condition is different and worthy of its own unique solution.  In this case, based on the way the contracts were written, the court has determined that these items are the property of the firm – right or wrong. I wonder just how many customers’ records this includes.  Would that be 10, 20, or 30 sets of blueprints and code – most likely way more?  Couldn’t Moglia have reached out to these customers offering them their documents/source-code for a nominal fee?  Certainly, as a customer with a working system who never felt at risk thinking that “my integrator will always be there for me”, couldn’t they be offered their material for say $2000.  While still distasteful, it would sure beat having to start from scratch. 

I like to say that during these times, it is important to “find a way”.  I recognize that most here feel that if the customer has paid in full, the code and documents belong to them.  That’s great but do you include that statement in your contracts?  I would guess that John felt the same but just never imagined this happening.

Julie, you did a great job on this and not just researching and writing a comprehensive piece, but for having the courage to call this one out.  Maybe some of your readers will take this information and do something positive with it.  Today’s economy is all about differentiating yourself from your competitors.  Here I see a great lesson.

Richard, thanks for the thoughtful comments.

It is my understanding that the COURTS did not determine that source code was the property of the integrator (but I would love to see a precedent if anyone knows of any). The bankruptcy attorney decided – naturally, because the trustees wanted (understandably) to recoup some of their losses.

For consumers who complained, they ended up getting the code.

But then again, as mentioned in the article, forget about the legalities. Customers need access to their source code. You KNOW that you’re going out of business. Do the right thing ... even if that means selling it to the customer for a modest sum.

Otherwise, as Kevin put it so poignantly, wealthy clients get turned off, tell all their friends, and our industry has just lost a couple dozen customers.

This is something that has bothered me for some time. We have always made a point of telling our clients that the uncompiled code is part of the system they are buying from us. We want our clients to stay with us because they want to, not because they are forced to. We are Crestron Dealers and if our client want to go to another dealer then we have let them down and need to take our lumps. On the other hand if we take care of our customer and install a great system we will always have thier business (and probably the neibors also).

Mike, are you serious? Or just stirring the pot? Did you get lost on your way to engadget?

“Bigger issue than who owns the code is why would an industry that is supposed to be delivering high tech to the affluent be using such an ancient technology as custom code. Any integrator who thinks crestron is high tech is defrauding their customer.”

Is it possible that you havent been to a real high tech installation? At first i thought you might be a Control4 dealer but even they arent this crazy. Next thing you will tell me is that private jets are a waste of money or i shouldnt pay for water.

Apple creates a fixed user interface that everyone has to adapt to. Crestrons user interface is created with a single persons wants and needs in mind. Thats the difference in Custom products and Consumer products.

When Apple is able to do what Crestron can, its pricing will be similar IMO. Not sure if that means Apple will cost more or Crestron will cost less but it doesnt matter because 10 years or more will have passed before this becomes an issue.

“The real issue is that software should be enterprise based and that every house should have the same code base, like an ipod. Then you add your content and apps and make it custom to the user like Apple.”

Crestron calls the software Simpl and their name for apps is modules. You can add any content and any feature imaginable to a crestron sytem.

A couple things to consider.

1.  It sounds like Mike was not smart enough to hire a good integrator.  The odds from where I am stand are that he either specified some of the components, or he shopped the system, tried to cut costs and went with low bid, or both - then was unpleasantly surprised when he got exactly what he paid for.  It is amazing how many people think they should get internet prices for gear that is being assembled into a custom system.  Almost as amazing as the number of people that think only their time is valuable. If the dealer does not get a decent margin they cannot afford to do a great job and provide great support.  So, remember that you get what you pay for.

2.  Custom systems are custom.  Sounds stupidly simple, but if you want something that gives you a basic set of functionality using a canned interface then go buy Windows, because you can do anything with windows, it never locks up, and it always works perfectly.   If you want to have a successful integration of complex equipment (that still to this day is not designed to play well with others - try distributing HDMI) that ends up being reliable and easy to use, then you simply must have the control portion custom programmed specifically for your exact needs.  There is no Out-Of-The-Box-Functionality that does it all.  Perhaps Mike should start up a company and develop the friggin unicorn he describes when he is tired of casting stones.

3.  The client needs to listen to the programmer when they suggest appropriate hardware or, more importantly, when they suggest that the super cool whiz-bag that you just have to have may not be appropriate for your system.  As I mentioned before, most of this stuff does not like to play together and some of it won’t play at all.  Experienced programmers are all too well aware of what works together and what does not.  So if you insist on including that Vizio LCD TV in your system, don’t be surprised when it sucks.  And, if you don’t get to talk to a programmer when you are evaluating a potential integrator, perhaps you better keep looking.  There are more than a few salesmen that may accidentally misrepresent what is actually possible.

4.  Integrators have better things to do than access other people’s systems, like making money for instance.  To think someone that has 50+K to fork over for Baumeister’s code is going to go turn on the lights at someones house (a jailable crime, no doubt) for a thrill is assinine.  To insinuate that they could disable the security system is to reveal the depth of ignorance of the insinuator.

5.  IMHO, each of Baumeisters clients should sue the pants off anyone that ends up with their source code and does not share it with them.  And they should sue anyone else involved, like the attorney and the trustees. 

I have a hard time thinking that the winning bidder will not just solicit the business of supporting those clients whose documentation they purchased, since that is the only business justification for the purchase.

Have a great weekend.

For the record Julie, customers who complained did not get the code.  I complained and did not get the code.

Perhaps customers who hired attorneys and sued or threatened to sue, they might have gotten the code.  I asked many times and was told that it belonged to the company and I couldn’t get it.  When I said that I paid for it and even pointed to line item charges that said “Crestron programming” I was told that nowhere in my contract did it state that I would receive the code when the project was done.

FBC—I’d be curious to learn more about the details. Please contact me and I will respect your anonymity. jjacobson at ehpub dot com.

KOL—you raise several good points but one that doesn’t resonate is No. 1: “It sounds like Mike was not smart enough to hire a good integrator.”

The smartest people on the planet have no idea how to distinguish a “good” integrator from a bad one.

Perhaps you would like to suggest how a non-techie can tell the difference?

One of the beautiful things about this country is that we are mostly free to move around it and conduct ourselves personally and professionally in unique (legally) ways.

Some businesses suck.  In every industry.

Putting aside any opinions on technology and what custom should look like, if a customer is about to hire and pay top dollar for services, they should interview their vendor.  If the vendor doesn’t cut the mustard, find one that will.

Advice to consumers who want to hire a company to install consumer electronics: Ask them for any source code.  If they don’t provide it, move on.

Listen, others have been mentioning this already, the likelyhood that another integration company is going to be able to pick up and use your code is not likely.  But if you did blow it and they want to bring someone else in to swap DVD players, come on.  Get over it.  If you’ve had more than a few clients, you’ve probably lost one.  Maybe they found out a cousin does installs, or someone at church, or whatever.

Here is the stipulation you can include.  We will provide you with the source code, but if the code is changed in anyway, our support and warranty are void.  Problem solved, you come out looking like someone that has integrity (that’s the word I’ve been looking for related to this topic) and the customer has another reason to stick with your business.  It sounds like most opinions have supported this same notion of providing the code.

If we educate consumers to aks the question, all dealers and installers who want to stay in business will comply.

It is not easy to find a good integrator.  Or a good general contractor.  But, one of the age old ways of finding a good -whatever- is to do careful research.  Request references from the prospective integrator, then follow up and actually check them out.  A great place to start is with yout architect or GC, if you have one, they are usually pretty straight about subs.  Be sure to ask people to speak freely and not just be polite or nice, because as a polite gentleperson we generally try to give the benefit of the doubt and not really slam someone else unless they are terrible.

Remember that you are not researching what components to include in your system, because a good integrator will be able to take care of that. What you are looking for is someone that can listen to your description of features you desire and what your budget is.

***BE HONEST ABOUT YOUR BUDGET!!! Don’t worry about being taken advantage of at this point because, a. you have not made any committment yet, and b. you have already checked references.  Remember, if you want a Rolls Royce, you will need to pay for a Rolls Royce.  Anyone that tells you you can have something as good as a Rolls for half the money is blowing smoke up your skirt.  A good integrator can tell you in short order if your dreams are aligned properly wioth your checkbook.

Don’t trust a “yes man”.  As an inexperienced non-techie you are certain to have at least one impossible desire, a good integrator will just tell you straight out that it is not going to happen.

Hope this helps.

Julie, I want to say that I appreciate your article.  I am a former Baumeister employee who sympathizes with clients in this situation.  If I had the power to help them, I would. 

I do agree that a paid-up customer deserves to own their code.  This should be an industry standard but obviously, it is not.  Hopefully, articles like yours will help to educate clients and they will begin to demand the program as part of their contract.  I also hope that some legal precedent will be set.

Where I disagree with you is in letting the manufacturers off so easily.  I believe they created this culture to begin with.  If we’re going to separate ethics from legalities, then Crestron and AMX should both be in the line of fire as well.  At least until they develop a fail-safe method for clients to access their programs.

Thanks again for the article.  This is an issue that gives a black eye to this whole industry.

Julie said:
“The smartest people on the planet have no idea how to distinguish a “good” integrator from a bad one.

Perhaps you would like to suggest how a non-techie can tell the difference?”

References?

David Thompson said:
“A solution to this problem would be for Creston to hold the programming code in a data bank.  If a company goes out of business and there is no other way for the customer to secure the code the customer could petition Creston for the code.”
David,
If you read the article you know where I stand, but the above suggestion is just not feasible.  It would be a logistical impossibility for Crestron, there would be no way to know that the programmer was giving them the latest file or even the right file and if you think some integrators are bad about wanting to give their code to their customers just wait until you try to force them to give it to a manufacturer.
The only way that a manufacturer solution would be feasible is to redesign the architecture of future processors so that the entire program must be uploaded, with a manufacturer back door that allows it to be extracted.
However I think there is a much better solution.  Industry awareness and customer education, which is exactly what this article is providing.  Because an educated customer is going to demand the code, the same way the dealer demands the code when they use an outside programmer for work.  Why do dealers *always* get the code?  Because they are informed and therefore can’t be taken advantage of.
And while it may anger some of my fellow integrators for me to say this, the reason this article angers some of them so much is they know that once the customer is informed about this issue they will no longer be able to get away with keeping the code.  An informed customer is a lot harder to take advantage of.
Look at it this way.  Why is it that I have never, ever heard of a customer who did not receive the code who knew they were not getting the code, in other words made conscious choice to work with someone knowing they would not get the code? The answer is obvious and I believe sums the issue up.  The people who are not providing the code are only able to get away with it by not informing or explaining the issue to the customer.  If the customers in Julie story had made an informed choice to agree that all they would receive is compiled code, knowing what that meant, than there would be little reason for this article.  They would be like a person who made an investment in a bad stock and lost.  But instead they are more like a person who unknowingly invested in a ponzi scheme.
Some integrators will argue that it’s not their responsibility to inform the customer, that it’s up to the customer to become informed (of course some of them are probably the same people that are upset about this article for doing just that and informing customers).  But in my opinion one of the signs of a *true* professional is they help their clients to make informed decisions.  Isn’t that after all, why we’ve been hired?  I suspect the same integrators who argue it’s the customers responsibility to educate themselves would be the ones screaming for someone’s head if they were put in a similar position.
I am incredibly pleased to see that the vast majority of responses here are positive.

Julie,
I have always found it kind of silly that a code writer for a control system (industrial, commercial, residential, or other) feels his or her code is so special they do not need to give it to the owner of the hardware! The software developed for these control systems is useless to anyone else unless they have that exact hardware configuration! I don’t believe I have ever seen that. These code writers are not writing code that 1 trillion people will steel and use on their home computers. Its bunk! The code belongs to the client that paid for a working system and that’s how we will always treat it with in my organization! If a coder has developed a great module or piece of code that may be useful to other coders they can always sell the rights to use their special piece of code to other programmers. This is being done every day and benefits the coder and the industry! I have done it! If its worth protecting it, has a value! Capitalize on that and let us all in the industry worry about keeping our clients happy and we will get our return calls that way!

Um, Drew, can I please have my code?

The whole intellectual property argument is hypocritcal for these guys illegally copying CDs DVDs and Blu rays and turning around and not giving their clients backup copies of their programming source codes.

Ask yourself how many of these guys have illegal music and movie files on their computers or entertainment servers and are calling the RIAA and MPAA asking if they’ll accept payment for that illegal copy of Back in Black or Star Wars that’s sitting on a hard drive. 

Don’t claim that it’s intellectual property only when it’s convenient for you. Do your clients a favor and give them the codes as part of the service you offer or truly support the act of artistic creation and buy your CDs, DVDs and Blu ray discs.

In any event dealers should be up front with clients on this issue to give them the option of buying the source code.

This entire issue is one that has held back the capabilities of the systems we do for years. There is no clearly accepted, supported, and promoted best-practices method to protect intellectual property while at the same time ensuring maintainability. This means the amount of IP risk a dealer or independent programmer takes on when pouring time into a proprietary idea or project is extremely high if the client gets the source. So your basic distributed audio system—no big deal to release the source code if the entire codebase was written for that one project. But as we all know, that is what nightmares are made of—for the integrator, the client, and worst, the service tech. It also means that very little in the way of cool features are provided, because the programming budget is blown on the basic functionality that got written from scratch. Any good programmer who’s been brought in to clean up a system has seen this and likely been embarrassed by the sheer waste of money and human resources for a crappy outcome. But when a dealer or independent programmer develops a stable, extensible, mature framework that covers many types of projects, the end product is much, much better—and some of every job’s programming budget can be used for developing neat things like Twitter modules, etc, etc. Unfortunately, since there’s no clearly accepted and supported method to protect that investment, in the short-sighted view there is little incentive for an integrator (much less a CAIP/ACE) to run their programming operation that way and we all get a bad rep for expensive crappy code. Closed control systems like Lifeware, C4, etc, are taking advantage of this by developing IP that is rolled into their tool (closed source), thereby end-running the Crestron/AMX crowd in terms of feature set.

This issue could be resolved in short order with a little help from our dear manufacturers. The mechanisms are already partially in place—with AMX, intellectual property can be protected with the use of compiled modules. With Crestron, it can be password-protected modules. If only the password protection were strong, and programmers knew how to architect their programs in a way that allows core IP to be isolated from sections that require maintenance. There’s an opportunity here for an industry-wide best practice, and the manufacturers would have to be involved. Agreed on CEDIA (or Infocomm) as a potential driver. It looks like Infocomm’s Independent Programmers Council is doing some work on best-practices, including intellectual property rights. Worth a call to see if they’re getting anywhere. Anyone know if CEDIA has something similar?