At what point is is called theft?

This is a hypethetical case of course (HA) Two, or more, people work together on a third-party tool or addon for a popular "off the self" software. When all is said and done, one of those people sells the tool/addon to another company for a profit or to start a business. This person does not have permission from the others that worked on the project and in fact the others that assisted are not to recieve any money from the sale of the tool/addon or any funds from the business that has started. At what point during this process, has the person making a profit from multiple persons work, stolen the intelectual property from the others? Is it OK for me, as one of many people that assisted in the development of a third party addon, to sell it without permission from the others? If so.... Is it OK for me to download a utility made by someone else, without my particpation, and sell it for my own profit? Is this an accepted way of working in the sim-community? What do you tink should happen to the person making the profit from other people's work? Why am I writing this? Only a moron would believe these are aceptable practices either in RAS or the outside world... right?

Tim McArthur <[email hidden]> wrote in article <39c10f3f.119691398@news>...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> This is a hypethetical case of course (HA) > > Two, or more, people work together on a third-party tool or addon for > a popular "off the self" software. When all is said and done, one of > those people sells the tool/addon to another company for a profit or > to start a business. This person does not have permission from the > others that worked on the project and in fact the others that assisted > are not to recieve any money from the sale of the tool/addon or any > funds from the business that has started. At what point during this > process, has the person making a profit from multiple persons work, > stolen the intelectual property from the others?

Who is the actaul owner of this tool or addon. That I guess is the biggest question. If he has ownership of the tool no matter who made it then it is his to do with whatever he pleases. If he asked you to do something for him and well you did it whether or not he paid you well then its a question of ownership. > > Is it OK for me, as one of many people that assisted in the > development of a third party addon, to sell it without permission from > the others? Again who owns it. If I had you do something for me and well you did not charge me for that work does it mean you own it still or do I own since it was my idea, you just provided a way for me to execute it. If you did not ask for payment, or get payment for that does not mean you own it. > > If so.... Is it OK for me to download a utility made by someone else, > without my particpation, and sell it for my own profit? It would not since you do not own it. The person who made it or posted it would be more of the owner then you would. For example Dave Noonan has made and posted a lot of items for Papy games. Some posted at his site like his convertor, some at The Pits. I would say what is on his site he owns and well what is at The Pits is owned by The Pits since Dave could elect to post it himself, but lets The Pits do that and in effect they are acting as a Distributor for his work, and by acting in that manner they do take ownership of that work. > > Is this an accepted way of working in the sim-community? > I donno it seems a lot of guys feel if its posted on the net and its free well its anyones to do with whatever they like. I presonally do not feel that way, but I am only one guy. > What do you tink should happen to the person making the profit from > other people's work? Hold on it happens all the time whether on the internet or in the real world. I do not know how many times I have done all the upfront work for a design and have a Me Too salesman come in and do nothing except say I will beat whatever he will do by 10%. I have learned to guard my work a bit better now since I deal with it everyday, guys who would not design there way out of a wet paperbag, but will bid a job that I ended up making the spec on. Well now the spec is written to where the Me Too salesman( I should say order takers since they could not sell Bread to a stavring Nation) cannot quote since he does not have anything that will work. > > Why am I writing this? Only a moron would believe these are aceptable > practices either in RAS or the outside world... right? > Whether or not its acceptable is one thing Tim, It happens all the damn time tho. Trust me I deal with it daily it seems. Dave

I came in late...so pardon me if I'm off on a sidetrack. Seems that there are legal issues here as well as ethical issues. Current US Copyright Law is heavily in favor of "authors", not "publishers". This was not always true, I think that the change occurred in the 1970's. In other countries, your milage may vary. As I understand it, the copyright belongs to the person(s) that did the work unless a special "work for hire" contract is in effect between the author and the person (or company) that is paying for the work. Otherwise, the copyright stays with the author(s), regardless of who paid to have the work done. There are lots more details, have a chat with an intellectual property lawyer or get a book from the library on copyright and patents to see how things work. -- Doug Douglas Milliken <[email hidden]> Milliken Research Associates Inc. On 15 Sep 2000, J. Todd Wasson wrote:

Quoted text (60 lines)

> >Two, or more, people work together on a third-party tool or addon for > >a popular "off the self" software. When all is said and done, one of > >those people sells the tool/addon to another company for a profit or > >to start a business. This person does not have permission from the > >others that worked on the project and in fact the others that assisted > >are not to recieve any money from the sale of the tool/addon or any > >funds from the business that has started. At what point during this > >process, has the person making a profit from multiple persons work, > >stolen the intelectual property from the others? > > The second those other folks that worked on it DON'T get paid, in my opinion, > unless they say it's ok. > > >Is it OK for me, as one of many people that assisted in the > >development of a third party addon, to sell it without permission from > >the others? > > > > Are they interested in profiting from their work too? Or do they not care? > > >If so.... Is it OK for me to download a utility made by someone else, > >without my particpation, and sell it for my own profit? > > HELL NO!! > > >Is this an accepted way of working in the sim-community? > > If I worked with you and several other folks on a project and you sold it and > didn't share, I'd be angry with you. > > >What do you tink should happen to the person making the profit from > >other people's work? > > I won't answer this one. I think it depends on the situation. Punishment > isn't something I care to discuss. Just don't do it. > > >Why am I writing this? Only a moron would believe these are aceptable > >practices either in RAS or the outside world... right? > > I don't know. I'm not a lawyer, nor have I given business ethics a whole lot > of thought. Lots of "hypothetical situations" can be brought forth and argued, > and a good arguer can probably make anything sound ok given enough time. Maybe > I'm closed minded, but I'd be angry if I worked on something with some folks > and one of them took off with it and sold it, leaving us out. Right or wrong, > I'd be PISSED!!! > > Todd Wasson > Performance Simulations > Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction > Software > http://PerformanceSimulations.Com > > Todd Wasson > --- > Performance Simulations > Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction > Software > http://PerformanceSimulations.Com > >

Quoted text (9 lines)

>Two, or more, people work together on a third-party tool or addon for >a popular "off the self" software. When all is said and done, one of >those people sells the tool/addon to another company for a profit or >to start a business. This person does not have permission from the >others that worked on the project and in fact the others that assisted >are not to recieve any money from the sale of the tool/addon or any >funds from the business that has started. At what point during this >process, has the person making a profit from multiple persons work, >stolen the intelectual property from the others?

The second those other folks that worked on it DON'T get paid, in my opinion, unless they say it's ok. >Is it OK for me, as one of many people that assisted in the >development of a third party addon, to sell it without permission from >the others? > Are they interested in profiting from their work too? Or do they not care? >If so.... Is it OK for me to download a utility made by someone else, >without my particpation, and sell it for my own profit? HELL NO!! >Is this an accepted way of working in the sim-community? If I worked with you and several other folks on a project and you sold it and didn't share, I'd be angry with you. >What do you tink should happen to the person making the profit from >other people's work? I won't answer this one. I think it depends on the situation. Punishment isn't something I care to discuss. Just don't do it. >Why am I writing this? Only a moron would believe these are aceptable >practices either in RAS or the outside world... right? I don't know. I'm not a lawyer, nor have I given business ethics a whole lot of thought. Lots of "hypothetical situations" can be brought forth and argued, and a good arguer can probably make anything sound ok given enough time. Maybe I'm closed minded, but I'd be angry if I worked on something with some folks and one of them took off with it and sold it, leaving us out. Right or wrong, I'd be PISSED!!! Todd Wasson Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com Todd Wasson --- Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

On 14 Sep 2000 21:55:34 GMT, "David" <[email hidden]> enlightened us all with these kind words of wisdom: >I would say what is on his site he >owns and well what is at The Pits is owned by The Pits since Dave could >elect to post it himself, but lets The Pits do that and in effect they are >acting as a Distributor for his work, and by acting in that manner they do >take ownership of that work. According to your look on this, The Pits owns whatever work Dave Noonan supplies them with, because otherwise he could have distributed his work himself. Wouldn't that mean that Electronic Boutiques also 'owns' all the games which it has ever distributed to us? Of course not. EB is a distributor. They do not create, or own, any of the games which they sell. Any game manufacturer 'could' distribute their games themselves, but they don't. Instead, they use a distributor like Electronic Boutiques, because they know that that's where people prefer to buy from. Dave Noonan owns all the applications he has built. The Pits distributes his software at his request and with his permission. This should make them entitled to a percentage of the profits, but it does not mean that they own his software. If you own something, you have the right to do with it what you please. Dave Noonan owns the applications he has created, so he can modify them in any way he wishes. The Pits does not own his applications, and has no right to modify a thing - not without Dave's consent. Best regards, Moon-Watcher

Thanks Doug, that is exactly how I feel about the my current issue with SearsGroup. They are claiming that I worked for them so they would then become the owners of my intelectual property. I of course am fighting the whole idea that I ever worked for them becuase of the property value of me having ownership of these files. No contracts were ever agreed upon verbally or written. I was never employed by Sears Group, SPR, or SMI, so the files I created are owned by meyself and no one else. Tom Pabst has put a 50 million dollar projected worth on Sears Group in the next 5 years. If I am the owner of the files that started the company, am I not entitled to a percentage of that 50 million? I think so, and so do the lawyers I have talked with. If someone is going to build a 50 million (plus) dollar business off my work, they damn well be prepared to fork out 20+ million to me. On Fri, 15 Sep 2000 06:50:14 GMT, Doug Milliken <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (87 lines)

> >I came in late...so pardon me if I'm off on a sidetrack. Seems that there >are legal issues here as well as ethical issues. > >Current US Copyright Law is heavily in favor of "authors", not >"publishers". This was not always true, I think that the change occurred >in the 1970's. In other countries, your milage may vary. > >As I understand it, the copyright belongs to the person(s) that did the >work unless a special "work for hire" contract is in effect between the >author and the person (or company) that is paying for the work. Otherwise, >the copyright stays with the author(s), regardless of who paid to have the >work done. > >There are lots more details, have a chat with an intellectual property >lawyer or get a book from the library on copyright and patents to see >how things work. > >-- Doug > Douglas Milliken <[email hidden]> > Milliken Research Associates Inc. > > > >On 15 Sep 2000, J. Todd Wasson wrote: > >> >Two, or more, people work together on a third-party tool or addon for >> >a popular "off the self" software. When all is said and done, one of >> >those people sells the tool/addon to another company for a profit or >> >to start a business. This person does not have permission from the >> >others that worked on the project and in fact the others that assisted >> >are not to recieve any money from the sale of the tool/addon or any >> >funds from the business that has started. At what point during this >> >process, has the person making a profit from multiple persons work, >> >stolen the intelectual property from the others? >> >> The second those other folks that worked on it DON'T get paid, in my opinion, >> unless they say it's ok. >> >> >Is it OK for me, as one of many people that assisted in the >> >development of a third party addon, to sell it without permission from >> >the others? >> > >> >> Are they interested in profiting from their work too? Or do they not care? >> >> >If so.... Is it OK for me to download a utility made by someone else, >> >without my particpation, and sell it for my own profit? >> >> HELL NO!! >> >> >Is this an accepted way of working in the sim-community? >> >> If I worked with you and several other folks on a project and you sold it and >> didn't share, I'd be angry with you. >> >> >What do you tink should happen to the person making the profit from >> >other people's work? >> >> I won't answer this one. I think it depends on the situation. Punishment >> isn't something I care to discuss. Just don't do it. >> >> >Why am I writing this? Only a moron would believe these are aceptable >> >practices either in RAS or the outside world... right? >> >> I don't know. I'm not a lawyer, nor have I given business ethics a whole lot >> of thought. Lots of "hypothetical situations" can be brought forth and argued, >> and a good arguer can probably make anything sound ok given enough time. Maybe >> I'm closed minded, but I'd be angry if I worked on something with some folks >> and one of them took off with it and sold it, leaving us out. Right or wrong, >> I'd be PISSED!!! >> >> Todd Wasson >> Performance Simulations >> Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction >> Software >> http://PerformanceSimulations.Com >> >> Todd Wasson >> --- >> Performance Simulations >> Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction >> Software >> http://PerformanceSimulations.Com >> >> >

In article <8pueb2$ke$[email hidden]>, "Marc Davey" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>If you were working for them then they are the owner of the fruit of your >labour. When you are employed by some one or an organisation then anything >you produce that is in the nature of the work you were employed to do is the >property of the employer, even if it was done after hours e.g if you are >employed as a programmer and you write a small app in your spare time to use >at home it is still the property of your employer. Seems tough I know, but >thats the way it works I'm afraid

Bullshi-... er, I disagree... :) If you write a program at home, it belongs to your COMPANY?!? Let 'em sue me... What I do on MY time is MY business, as long as I'm not using company resources. Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. +50.77 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

If you were working for them then they are the owner of the fruit of your labour. When you are employed by some one or an organisation then anything you produce that is in the nature of the work you were employed to do is the property of the employer, even if it was done after hours e.g if you are employed as a programmer and you write a small app in your spare time to use at home it is still the property of your employer. Seems tough I know, but thats the way it works I'm afraid Regards Marc Davey "Tim McArthur" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:39c264ec.66212439@news...

Quoted text (24 lines)

> Thanks Doug, that is exactly how I feel about the my current issue > with SearsGroup. They are claiming that I worked for them so they > would then become the owners of my intelectual property. I of course > am fighting the whole idea that I ever worked for them becuase of the > property value of me having ownership of these files. No contracts > were ever agreed upon verbally or written. I was never employed by > Sears Group, SPR, or SMI, so the files I created are owned by meyself > and no one else. > > Tom Pabst has put a 50 million dollar projected worth on Sears Group > in the next 5 years. If I am the owner of the files that started the > company, am I not entitled to a percentage of that 50 million? I think > so, and so do the lawyers I have talked with. > > If someone is going to build a 50 million (plus) dollar business off > my work, they damn well be prepared to fork out 20+ million to me. > > > > On Fri, 15 Sep 2000 06:50:14 GMT, Doug Milliken > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >I came in late...so pardon me if I'm off on a sidetrack. Seems that

there

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >are legal issues here as well as ethical issues. > > > >Current US Copyright Law is heavily in favor of "authors", not > >"publishers". This was not always true, I think that the change occurred > >in the 1970's. In other countries, your milage may vary. > > > >As I understand it, the copyright belongs to the person(s) that did the > >work unless a special "work for hire" contract is in effect between the > >author and the person (or company) that is paying for the work.

Otherwise, > >the copyright stays with the author(s), regardless of who paid to havethe

Quoted text (25 lines)

> >work done. > > > >There are lots more details, have a chat with an intellectual property > >lawyer or get a book from the library on copyright and patents to see > >how things work. > > > >-- Doug > > Douglas Milliken <[email hidden]> > > Milliken Research Associates Inc. > > > > > > > >On 15 Sep 2000, J. Todd Wasson wrote: > > > >> >Two, or more, people work together on a third-party tool or addon for > >> >a popular "off the self" software. When all is said and done, one of > >> >those people sells the tool/addon to another company for a profit or > >> >to start a business. This person does not have permission from the > >> >others that worked on the project and in fact the others that assisted > >> >are not to recieve any money from the sale of the tool/addon or any > >> >funds from the business that has started. At what point during this > >> >process, has the person making a profit from multiple persons work, > >> >stolen the intelectual property from the others? > >> > >> The second those other folks that worked on it DON'T get paid, in my

opinion,

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >> unless they say it's ok. > >> > >> >Is it OK for me, as one of many people that assisted in the > >> >development of a third party addon, to sell it without permission from > >> >the others? > >> > > >> > >> Are they interested in profiting from their work too? Or do they not

care?

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >> > >> >If so.... Is it OK for me to download a utility made by someone else, > >> >without my particpation, and sell it for my own profit? > >> > >> HELL NO!! > >> > >> >Is this an accepted way of working in the sim-community? > >> > >> If I worked with you and several other folks on a project and you

sold it and > >> didn't share, I'd be angry with you. > >> > >> >What do you tink should happen to the person making the profit from > >> >other people's work? > >> > >> I won't answer this one. I think it depends on the situation.Punishment > >> isn't something I care to discuss. Just don't do it. > >> > >> >Why am I writing this? Only a moron would believe these areaceptable > >> >practices either in RAS or the outside world... right? > >> > >> I don't know. I'm not a lawyer, nor have I given business ethics awhole lot > >> of thought. Lots of "hypothetical situations" can be brought forth andargued, > >> and a good arguer can probably make anything sound ok given enoughtime. Maybe > >> I'm closed minded, but I'd be angry if I worked on something with somefolks > >> and one of them took off with it and sold it, leaving us out. Right orwrong,

Quoted text (18 lines)

> >> I'd be PISSED!!! > >> > >> Todd Wasson > >> Performance Simulations > >> Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction > >> Software > >> http://PerformanceSimulations.Com > >> > >> Todd Wasson > >> --- > >> Performance Simulations > >> Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction > >> Software > >> http://PerformanceSimulations.Com > >> > >> > > >

Sorry, but thats not true and they would have a very good case to sue you (and win) Regards Marc Davey "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <8pueb2$ke$[email hidden]>, "Marc Davey" > <[email hidden]> writes: > > >If you were working for them then they are the owner of the fruit of your > >labour. When you are employed by some one or an organisation thenanything > >you produce that is in the nature of the work you were employed to do isthe > >property of the employer, even if it was done after hours e.g if you are > >employed as a programmer and you write a small app in your spare time touse > >at home it is still the property of your employer. Seems tough I know,but

Quoted text (16 lines)

> >thats the way it works I'm afraid > > Bullshi-... er, I disagree... :) > > If you write a program at home, it belongs to your COMPANY?!? Let 'em sue > me... > What I do on MY time is MY business, as long as I'm not using company > resources. > > Eldred > -- > Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > GPL hcp. +50.77 > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats

you > with experience... > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <8q0v88$2ap$[email hidden]>, "Marc Davey" <[email hidden]> writes: >Sorry, but thats not true and they would have a very good case to sue you >(and win) > >Regards >Marc Davey Just because you're a programmer by trade?!? So, you work for a bank, writing COBOL programs. On nights and weekends you write Quake 5D, market it, and make a million dollars. The bank *can't* claim ownership of the game. First, you did it on your own time. Second, your place of employment only uses COBOL. Presumably, you've programmed your game in a different(better) language. Third, it's not even in the same category. There's no conflict of interest. So what's the charge in the lawsuit? Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. +50.77 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Unfortunately it's not about conflict of interest. In most parts of the world Copyright Law is very specific, when you are employed by some one or an organisation (employed by, rather than contracted to) any thing you produce, that is of a nature that is similar to that which you are employed to do, is, and remains your employers intellectual property. The example you give is far enough removed from what you were employed to do and would in all actuality not be a prob. But if it was some sort of Banking or allied app that you wrote in your spare time, then you open up a whole new world of probs. The trouble is that current Copyright law is based on principles that are quite old and that have been modified as time goes by, and alot of the situations that arise today, would not have even been thought of when these laws were drafted. Regards Marc Davey "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> In article <8q0v88$2ap$[email hidden]>, "Marc Davey" > <[email hidden]> writes: > > >Sorry, but thats not true and they would have a very good case to sue you > >(and win) > > > >Regards > >Marc Davey > > Just because you're a programmer by trade?!? So, you work for a bank,

writing > COBOL programs. On nights and weekends you write Quake 5D, market it, andmake > a million dollars. The bank *can't* claim ownership of the game. First,you > did it on your own time. Second, your place of employment only usesCOBOL. > Presumably, you've programmed your game in a different(better) language. > Third, it's not even in the same category. There's no conflict ofinterest.

Quoted text (9 lines)

> So what's the charge in the lawsuit? > > Eldred > -- > Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > GPL hcp. +50.77 > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats

you > with experience... > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Upon nearing completion of my first Windows app, I asked a software company owner about this subject. He replied, then went ahead and posted his views on the subject at a programmer's forum. I strongly recommend reading this discussion! http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Forum4/HTML/002024.html Todd Wasson --- Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

In article <8q1r73$2op$[email hidden]>, "Marc Davey" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (13 lines)

>Unfortunately it's not about conflict of interest. In most parts of the >world Copyright Law is very specific, when you are employed by some one or >an organisation (employed by, rather than contracted to) any thing you >produce, that is of a nature that is similar to that which you are employed >to do, is, and remains your employers intellectual property. The example you >give is far enough removed from what you were employed to do and would in >all actuality not be a prob. But if it was some sort of Banking or allied >app that you wrote in your spare time, then you open up a whole new world of >probs. >The trouble is that current Copyright law is based on principles that are >quite old and that have been modified as time goes by, and alot of the >situations that arise today, would not have even been thought of when these >laws were drafted.

Ok, so you write a banking app(not sure what an 'allied' app is) for the PC. Again, the bank uses COBOL and mainframes. In other words, they have no stake in a PC market... Eldred - I still say that's bullshit(the law, not you)... -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. +50.77 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Your not wrong about the law being bullshit, when you are forced to deal with some of the intricacies of it as often as I am, a lot of it starts to look like plain idiocy. Regards Marc Davey "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <8q1r73$2op$[email hidden]>, "Marc Davey" > <[email hidden]> writes: > > >Unfortunately it's not about conflict of interest. In most parts of the > >world Copyright Law is very specific, when you are employed by some oneor > >an organisation (employed by, rather than contracted to) any thing you > >produce, that is of a nature that is similar to that which you areemployed > >to do, is, and remains your employers intellectual property. The exampleyou > >give is far enough removed from what you were employed to do and would in > >all actuality not be a prob. But if it was some sort of Banking or allied > >app that you wrote in your spare time, then you open up a whole new worldof > >probs. > >The trouble is that current Copyright law is based on principles that are > >quite old and that have been modified as time goes by, and alot of the > >situations that arise today, would not have even been thought of whenthese > >laws were drafted. > > Ok, so you write a banking app(not sure what an 'allied' app is) for thePC. > Again, the bank uses COBOL and mainframes. In other words, they have nostake

Quoted text (9 lines)

> in a PC market... > > Eldred - I still say that's bullshit(the law, not you)... > -- > Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > GPL hcp. +50.77 > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats

you > with experience... > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

"Tim McArthur" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:39c264ec.66212439@news...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> Thanks Doug, that is exactly how I feel about the my current issue > with SearsGroup. They are claiming that I worked for them so they > would then become the owners of my intelectual property. I of course > am fighting the whole idea that I ever worked for them becuase of the > property value of me having ownership of these files. No contracts > were ever agreed upon verbally or written. I was never employed by > Sears Group, SPR, or SMI, so the files I created are owned by meyself > and no one else. > > Tom Pabst has put a 50 million dollar projected worth on Sears Group > in the next 5 years. If I am the owner of the files that started the > company, am I not entitled to a percentage of that 50 million? I think > so, and so do the lawyers I have talked with. > > If someone is going to build a 50 million (plus) dollar business off > my work, they damn well be prepared to fork out 20+ million to me. >

Tim, I think the most important question at this time is "Can he go forward without your help or your files?" If he can, your legs are weak. If not, negotiate a good deal for you and get it in writing. The fight over who owns the files at this point is probably a lose-lose situation where only the lawyers win. Also consider the other authors in this deal since I assume the simulator to be used is not your work.