Live data from Hacker News

Developers’ side projects

joelonsoftware.com

51–60 of 411 posts

Re: Developers’ side projects

#51
post #28

I got a little confused of this article. Firstly, the author try to say that side projects are belong to the company hires you as full time employee, and, then throw the game designer example, but it sounds to me like the game designer is contractor not a full-time employee, so, it follows the default copyright, I am ok with that, and then, the author start using this case to approve the relationship between your sid…

The game designer is a full-time employee.

'You are going to pay the game designer $6,000 a month to invent new games.'

This is what origin say in the article, it sounds to me really not like a full time employee.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#52
post #4

This gets super muddied when you consider doing FOSS contributions as part of your work. Sure you can sign a contributor agreement, but its not yours to give away. The employer owns the code you contributed to a FOSS project. The project got the signature from the wrong entity.

> The employer owns the code you contributed to a FOSS project. I think this is a pretty US-only type thing; at least it's not very common in Europe. Usually (in Europe) ownership of code depends entirely on when you did the coding -- if it's on your own time you own the code. If it's when you're at work then obviously it's the company's code. Of course there are the usual caveats about "is it too closely related to…

Indeed. Example:

In Germany you usually have some paragraphs on this in the (work) contract (there are a couple popular variations - there isn't much leeway provided by German law here, which is good). "We own everything you do" is definitely illegal in Germany, and also not put into work contracts (such a clause would be void anyway).

The legal construction is basically that the employee grants an exclusive, irrevocable license[1] to any IP produced by the employee for the employer. There is of course a grey zone here, but it's quite narrow, and directly non-existent if the side project is unrelated to the current core business of the employer.

FOSS contributions aren't really touched by this; you work on behalf of the employer to contribute to a FOSS project and the exact same terms and conditions apply as always (you put your name on it, not your employers; since exclusivity of the license implicitly granted to your employer conflicts with the FOSS terms, but the employer explicitly commissioned you to do that, the latter "wins" over the former, ie. the license of your employer to the diffs you write becomes non-exclusive in these cases, because the exclusivity is implicitly revoked by the work assignment, essentially action implying intention) -- or so it was explained to me).

[1] This also means that you retain your copyright: it's not possible to transfer copyright in Germany. Very rarely things like "Copyright (c) 1871-1918 Softwareschmiede GmbH" pop up in open sourced stuff, but it's obviously something stamped on when open sourcing, and equally obviously incorrect. The copyright still belongs to the developers involved in the project, but because the company "Softwareschmiede GmbH" has an exclusive license they can re-license it on their own accord under any terms they want. They'd still have to, technically, state the correct copyright, though.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Isn't law school a few years?

Re: Developers’ side projects

#54
I've had three companies rewrite or append something about past IP or even current IP on the weekends unrelated to the company, the company's hardware, or the company's time.

If you approach it right (sometimes I show them how this limits our ability to work with OpenSource software) you can often swing it. Admittedly, the larger companies are less likely to entertain the request of some new hire.

I think more people should bring this up in the hiring process (you don't have to push it), but lets teach companies that it's not just vacation that maters to us.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#55

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.

A company I worked for (property appraisal company) got acquired by another company. They forced one of the higher up developers out. 6 months later that developer wrote an app dealing with lines at Disney and was making money on ad revenue. The company came after him claiming they owned it because he used skills and knowledge he gained while employed to write that app. We had a "everything you do at any time belongs to us" contract.

So it does actually happen.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#56

This topic is very interesting to me. With that said, which employer wants their employee watching TV and not breathing software 24/7? I really struggle to imagine the risk here is greater than the reward.

I certainly would prefer that my employees not get burned out. What they do after work is none of my business, but I definitely hope most of them aren't living and breathing work 24/7.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#57

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…

[deleted]

Re: Developers’ side projects

#58
As a Canadian I don't even know what the requirements are, or protections if any. But I did notice one thing in particular: you need your own equipment (no company equipment) to qualify under the Californian protections.

How does this factor into bring your own device (BYOD)? At what point is it your employers equipment, and at what point is it yours? I think BYOD is a terrible idea for several reasons (usually leveraged as a cost-saving measure, can't 100% verify that all company data is wiped at end of employment, etc), but this seems like it muddles the whole thing further. If you only own the devices that you use to work, does everything belong to your employer and how can you draw a line?

Re: Developers’ side projects

#59
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

If you read the full article, it covers the law in California which has three tests. Two of those tests are straightforward (company time and company equipment), but the third (related to the company's business) is less straightforward. My impression as a non-laywer is that the courts will probably take a somewhat narrow view of that third test, but the actual language in the law is pretty vague and some companies ar…

I think he is too dismissive of company time though. Company time is very straightforward only if you work 9-5, but a lot of companies let developers work flexible hours and work from home, which I think makes company time less straight forward. Then when you add on call or emergency work you have to do off hours or on weekends (even once every 6 months) it makes the idea of "company time" even more vague.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#60
This presents a false dilemma. There are other options than "own everything" or "be negligent and get sued."

Contracts can say almost anything. You can agree to grant the company a liberal license to anything you deliver to the company or incorporate into any product of the company. You can make a similarly protective agreement on the patent front.

There, now you own what you do on your own time and the company isn't at risk of a lawsuit from you.

Post reply on HN