Recently I was asked to continue work on my graduate research. The research was to develop code to model multiphase flow. As a student, I worked on the 2-phase code and am now being asked to expand the work into 3 phases. However, I just found out that Chevron claims ownership of the code. I never signed a contract, but supposedly since I signed a contract with Notre Dame, and they signed a contract with Chevron I don't "own" the code. Ironically, the methodology (my dissertation) is free to use. So, anyone could write the code following my dissertation, but no one can see my code.
The consequences of this private code / public knowledge issue is quite convoluted. The purpose of IP according to Chevron is to slow down the competition from gaining the technology. But what about me? I developed the code so even if I don't own it I'd be able to quickly reproduce it. I was told this reproduction would be "suspicious", it's suspicious that I would rewrite the code when I have access to the original code. So even though anyone could reproduce the code, it would be "suspicious" if I - the one who understands it best - reproduced it. Furthermore, how am I supposed to work on developing the code further when I am no longer at Notre Dame and I no longer have the right to use the code?
If I do develop the 3-phase code I'd be doing it outside of ND, and I never signed a contract to give IP rights to Chevron. What then? I won't belabor this issue anymore now. What's underlying the problem is the application of property rights to non-scarce goods. My code is infinitely reproducible and my use of the code does not hamper Chevron's use. In fact, Chevron doesn't even understand the code and thus only uses a fraction of its potential while simultaneously banning my use of it.
