[andhof-mt]

I worked as a contract engineer for several years and here is my take:

Typically in a contract relationship you have alot less obligations than hiring a salaried employee. At the same time, this person is using their valuable time towards your project. As a result of this, they usually ask for compensation which is agreed upon beforehand.

You agreed to a certain amount of compensation, and than chose not to pay. Sometimes contractors do not meet expectation, and I've seen this happen. But if you have already agreed upon milestones it is only appropriate to pay them at least up to the point at which you request they quit or fire them.

If you did not agree upon milestones (which a business with your funding should have.) You should still be paying him for the work done. Your disagreement over his work could cause his family to go hungry for a week. Such is the life of a contractor.

All in all, perhaps both of you performed without much regard to ethic. He did a shoddy job and you refused to pay. But your running the business and as a result have a lot more to lose from a bad image.

Just pay up and move on.

[otakucode]

You mean as an employer I can't just use 'contractor' as a way to skirt paying payroll taxes, unemployment, workers comp, etc and then hire the cheapest dev I can find and refuse payment if the work isn't top notch? As far as I've been able to determine, as an employer I am entitled to software. I am entitled to workers who produce things that amplify the earnings of my company by an order of magnitude while paying just enough to keep the workers complacent. This is America, is it not?

(note: This post has been sarcasm.)