Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Developers’ side projects

joelonsoftware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 411 posts

Re: Developers’ side projects

#31

Post by nostromo »

This is a good article, but the "let them eat cake"-iness of the last paragraph is pretty chilling.

> the only way to gain independence is to be independent. Being an employee of a high tech company whose product is intellectual means that you have decided that you want to sell your intellectual output, and maybe that’s OK, and maybe it’s not, but it’s a free choice.

I was hoping for a closing argument about how thoughtful employers could accommodate their legal requirements while also respecting independent employee creations.

Instead he seems to just be saying that employees that want to keep their side projects should just quit.

Reading that might give me pause about taking a position at Fog Creek.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#32

Post by abritinthebay »

lowglow wrote: post #12

IIRC california if you don't use company assets, side projects are yours. Speaking of, I'd like some collaborators to help with my side project "Terra Plant": https://baqqer.com/collaborate

True, but there's an important caveat that they go over in the article: it must not be "related" to your current company.

If that's Google, Apple, or Microsoft... related is a LOT of topics.

Also say you're a games programmer - better not code up a hobby game in your spare time and sell it.

... and so on.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#34

Post by kmonsen »

paulrosenzweig wrote: post #10

I haven't heard about many disputed cases. I'd hope that if Google went around suing for possession of unrelated side projects, we'd hear about it. Maybe the possibility of being publicly shamed is a deterrent from pursing ownership.

Google is actually pretty good about this. They clarify some areas that are no-no, and there is a simple process for asking if a side project can be released as open source.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#35

Post by skybrian »

nostromo wrote: post #31

This is a good article, but the "let them eat cake"-iness of the last paragraph is pretty chilling. > the only way to gain independence is to be independent. Being an employee of a high tech company whose product is intellectual means that you have decided that you want to sell your intellectual output, and maybe that’s OK, and maybe it’s not, but it’s a free choice. I was hoping for a closing argument about how thou…

Yes, it seems weird that he doesn't say how to fix this:

Get written agreement from your employer that your side project is your own. Some employers even have a standard process for doing this.

They might say no, but then you know not to put any more work into it.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#36

Post by tptacek »

jpmcglone wrote: post #33

What if the company does work out of San Francisco California, is incorporated in Delaware, but I live in North Carolina? Am I still protected?

Not a lawyer, probably wrong, but: California's courts won't enforce a contract not recognized by California law, but the courts of other states will, and it will depend on whether the employer can get personal jurisdiction for the case in the right state.

The short answer is: in your situation, you'd need a lawyer.

(I think --- not sure, not an authority --- that the "incorporation in Delaware" part of this has minimal impact; your residence in North Carolina, and the firm's operations in California, are probably the big two salient facts).

Re: Developers’ side projects

#39

Post by guelo »

The conclusion of this article hinges on the vagueness of "related to your employer’s line of work". From that he concludes that all employee developers have effectively sold their total intellectual output. But that is bullshit. The vagueness doesn't make the law meaningless. He admits that a judge and jury would probably side with the employee but still picks the company's side for his conclusion (the sarcastic "big bad Google" gives away his mindset). It is true that a company will generally have more resources than you and can grind you down legally, but in general they don't because, besides the money, it's a time suck for everybody, potentially bad press, and really bad for morale

Re: Developers’ side projects

#40

Post by jacques_chester »

ferbivore wrote: post #30
jacques_chester wrote: post #21

Briefly: consult a lawyer.

Isn't it tragic how "pay a lawyer to tell you what your rights are" seems to be the answer to everything?

Yes and no. My thinking is coloured by a few years in law school before dropping out.

If there is a true "five nines" in our lives, it's the reliability of the law. We each interact with and under the law dozens, hundreds, even thousands of times every day without ever needing recourse to lawyers.

But when you need a lawyer, you need a lawyer. One might as well sigh heavily about needing plumbers when the pipe bursts. Specialisation is normal and -- this is what I like most -- lawyers are more than a paid service. They have a fiduciary duty, they are ethically required to be dutiful advocates.

Personally, while I wish the world was simple and lawyers were cheap, I have never regretted spending the money to consult with them.

Post reply on HN