The article should stay focused on informing the users they should discuss with their CI the issue of code licensing.

It should not imply what their rights are. Or even the issues discussed here regarding who's copyright etc. Journalism is about fact not opinion.

Until there is a case or law that clearly states ownership, each installer and user should discuss the relationship they wish to pursue.

Clients should not be held hostage by their programmers either. If a CI can no longer support a project then the CI should either sell or hand over a copy of the program for someone else to support it.

Does anyone not agree that the terms should be in a contract and discussed before project completion?