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

151–160 of 411 posts

Re: Developers’ side projects

#151

Post by patmcguire »

tptacek wrote: post #36
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 mini…

I've never seen a contract that didn't stipulate the jurisdiction it would be enforced in. Maybe that doesn't matter, I know there's a lot of overreach in these things.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#152

Post by ausjke »

A good write definitely and I have been cautious on those, i.e. if I want to make some real products I do not work for anyone in-between to stay clean. Side-project is too tricky for both sides.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#153

Post by cookiecaper »

rjurney wrote: post #121
fao_ wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But, not everyone works in the US, or California, or for a company in CA?

Yup, but if you don't you need to understand how bad your state is fucking you by seeing how good we have it in California.

Something like this might be a deterrent for a company that would otherwise be interested in suing, but it's not going to stop a determined foe from really messing up your life. You'll win ... if you have the cash to fight them (which you don't, unless you're making enough money that a lawsuit is a total non-issue). In practice, you'll settle to stop the legal expenses, and they'll get at least a chunk of your project.

When you're successful you have to expect that some people you knew before you found success will get salty and think that you owe it all to them. A few of these people may be inclined to file a lawsuit, including your former employers. They see a pie and want to claim a piece of it.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#154

Post by ChuckMcM »

microcolonel wrote: post #128
leggomylibro wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the first point, big companies clearly feel that they can claim any project that is related to the company's lines of work, not yours. Companies like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft have arms for hardware design, video game development, web development, close-to-the-metal graphical programming, embedded systems, retail...that's not just big enough to drive a truck through, it's big enough for that platform they truc…

Specifically at Google, you must submit work-unrelated open source submissions through Google legal; though they seem to be fairly quick with it.

When I was there I submitted three, every time they came back and said that they wouldn't sign off because it was related. The last one was an iOS only kitchen timer application.

It was at that point I was was convinced that emailing legal to ask permission was a hack to get you to disclose early what you were working on so that when they sued you they already had some of the initial leg work done :-(.

I consulted with an attorney on this and they advised me that because I was working in California the burden of proof that it was related to Google's business was on Google. But that in his experience they were not above pushing the edge of the definition. The bigger point though was that people don't work at companies that are suing them and generally don't work at any company if they have a reputation (real or imagined) of doing work on their own time that is "against" their employers interest.

The summary of his advice was never, under any circumstances, work on any project you don't want to give Google ownership of while you are employed there. And when you have an idea that you want to develop, quit so that those parts of your employment agreement are nullified.

They can still come after you if they think you are using "proprietary or confidential" information in your new effort but that is less common and it makes them look like the bad guys not you.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#155

Post by kasey_junk »

derekp7 wrote: post #126
bnmillar wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A contract I was offered had this crap in it. I asked them to clarify in writing what "related to the work" means. They refused so I declined the offer.

I wonder what legal recourse you have, if you don't get that contract until after your starting date (and have already left a previous job)? Even if you ask for all contract information ahead of time before accepting the job offer, and they conveniently leave that one out until after starting?

Depends on the state, but many assume you are competent to negotiate these issues before accepting employment.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#156

Post by [deleted] »

derekp7 wrote: post #126
bnmillar wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A contract I was offered had this crap in it. I asked them to clarify in writing what "related to the work" means. They refused so I declined the offer.

I wonder what legal recourse you have, if you don't get that contract until after your starting date (and have already left a previous job)? Even if you ask for all contract information ahead of time before accepting the job offer, and they conveniently leave that one out until after starting?

[deleted]

Re: Developers’ side projects

#157

Post by tbabb »

He doesn't mention that many companies who want to be friendly to their creative tech employees' habits have a legal/approval process for carving out specific side projects.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#158

Post by kcl »

Is Joel a supervillain? Why is Joel writing this and, given his obvious conflict of interest, addressing it to developers as if it were friendly advice, when it is not?

I advise people not to work for Joel or his companies. This is developer-hostile advice from someone who should know better. You don't want to work for a guy like this or his companies.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#159

Post by scaredthrowaway »

tptacek wrote: post #112
alxmng wrote: post #65

> Not related to your employer’s line of work. Um, wait. What’s the definition of related? [...] I don’t know. It’s a big enough ambiguity that you could drive a truck through it. No, it's not that ambiguous at all. The courts rarely side with the company, and only in cases where it's quite obvious the work was directly related. If your side project isn't directly related to the work you are doing, then you don't nee…

This is terribly dangerous logic exactly because it's so alluringly close to right. As I said elsewhere on the thread: the worst, most heartbreaking problems a startup can have are the kind that only become apparent after the company is successful. You screw up vesting or grants somehow. You mess up liability in a contract, or don't get any legal review at all. In almost every case, you're fine either way... ... exce…

Yeah, but if you do the invention off the clock, after you started? And you decide to disclose?

No one will ever give you a yes or no answer. Never. It's like raising VC, or invading Russia. They will just put everything off until tomorrow. Forever.

I worked at That Place In The Valley that is not in Cupertino or Menlo Park. I tried to get "I own the IP" authorization for some side project that didn't matter to the business. I had a meeting every two weeks or so for a year and a half and nothing ever happened.

But now they know about it, and could make a claim if it blew up. So that's over.

Re: Developers’ side projects

#160

Post by greggman »

gumby wrote: post #113
alxmng wrote: post #65

> Not related to your employer’s line of work. Um, wait. What’s the definition of related? [...] I don’t know. It’s a big enough ambiguity that you could drive a truck through it. No, it's not that ambiguous at all. The courts rarely side with the company, and only in cases where it's quite obvious the work was directly related. If your side project isn't directly related to the work you are doing, then you don't nee…

> The courts rarely side with the company, and only in cases where it's quite obvious the work was directly related. The courts in California rarely side with the company, (so if you work on billing for Google and decide to do some machine learning on the side, even though Google does a lot of ML work no court would find in their favor -- though I doubt google would go after you anyway). But at the opposite end of th…

That doesn't fit my understanding of the law. Do you have references? The law has this concept of "duty of loyalty" which basically says by being an employee you are promising to do what's best for the company. As one example that means not competing against the company. In otherwords even if it's not related to your specific job you can not work on a product that competes with the company.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_of_loyalty

https://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/lexispsl/employment/document/3...

Post reply on HN