I think we're looking at this from different angles - but I really don't understand your position and why it seems so complicated.
So while I may have it wrong - for all practical purposes - I think I have it right.
When a trader contracts with you to code their "special recipe" of indicators or whatever - why do you believe that YOU would be entitled to anything beyond the coding fee and personal access to the EA?
It seems to me that it's very similar to asking you to translate a book that we wrote into a foreign language. We pay you a fee to do that. And that's the end of the story. It's our book, not yours.
Your task isn't to invent the foreign language. That already exists. It's simply to translate OUR work into that existing foreign language.
Now I understand that you've got a software company and everything going on - but as this thread surely demonstrates - we're in a global economy and I don't believe that your business model is going to allow you to be very competitive in this line of work, coding EA's.
There's a million analogies that apply to this situation. For example, if we record a song in your recording studio, it's still OUR song. But apparently with your business model, you intend to sell our "music" and cut us out of the loop?
We as traders are the artists here. You're merely providing a technical function that's, frankly, rather common. Although you do want to latch onto a good source when you find one.
Having said all that - it just goes to show once again that Optimu has demonstrated that he can easily, efficiently and cost-effectively meet the needs of probably 9 out of every 10 people wanting their EA coded.
Just don't crowd me out of his schedule please!
