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

GitHub lets staff own IP developed for personal projects using company resources

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 484 posts

Re: GitHub lets staff own IP developed for personal projects using company resources

#241

Post by jboggan »

rrdharan wrote: post #184
BuuQu9hu wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your employer, of course, is Google; I know this from my own tussles with Google's OSPO, which exists primarily to ensure that engineers don't have lives outside of Google.

[Disclaimer: I work at Google.] I see no conclusive evidence in the parent comment that proves it's Google. I would've actually guessed Apple. My understanding is that Google actually has a reasonable process for this, and that people have taken advantage of it to start or contribute to projects in a personal capacity.

Probably not Google, they do have a process for open source contributions though it is pretty expansive - technically you need approval for answering a Stack Overflow question with a code snippet.

They do approve side projects in rarer cases where it has nothing to do with Google's business - for example, my friend recently wrote an app for sex positions. But most things that I want to work on have a messaging / ML / AR component to them somewhere so I haven't felt comfortable building anything while I've been employed there. Hence the main reason I'm leaving Google at the end of the month, to build those things :)

Re: GitHub lets staff own IP developed for personal projects using company resources

#243

Post by diiaann »

My father was extremely careful about this when he wanted to start his own company. He quit his large corporation, and then worked at much smaller company until what he wanted to do solidified in his mind. He was extremely scrupulous about not using company issued materials to do anything.

Re: GitHub lets staff own IP developed for personal projects using company resources

#244

Post by alkonaut »

superbatfish wrote: post #126

Look, this is nice for github employees, but it's worth noting that this is not an easy decision for all companies to make. We (developers) aren't like factory workers cranking out widgets by the hour. We're paid to think deeply about challenging problems. For me, that means chewing on a problem for a long time, often when I'm not at work. Honestly, when a problem is challenging, I can't get it out of my mind. I'm th…

I think about work problems that way, but I think the same way about my side projects.

I don't know exactly what my contract says about side project IP but I'm assuming it's a vanilla "we own what you make on company time and/or relating to company business".

I have zero problems with that.

What would the alternative be from the perspective of my employer? Assuming they own the game I make on weekends because I'm an employee? Or hoping that because they pay me so well, I'd spend any time coding on evenings doing stuff that benefits my employer?

Of course I think about my side projects while working, just like I think about my work problems at home, or my family while working. It's hard to imagine not doing that. I work 8 hours per day and if it's interesting work I might think about it in the evening. But no compensation would make me an employee in my spare time.

Re: GitHub lets staff own IP developed for personal projects using company resources

#245

Post by awinter-py »

DannyBee wrote: post #240
awinter-py wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah -- this seems not to differ from the law in california / wisconsin. http://law.justia.com/codes/california/2011/lab/division-3/2... These states already assign employees work 'not using equipment', 'not resulting from work', 'not in the employer's area of business'. Many california-based companies will echo this language in the IP assignment section of their employment contract. These protections don't help you…

"These states already assign employees work 'not using equipment', 'not resulting from work', 'not in the employer's area of business'." This is close but no cigar: You missed " or actual or demonstrably anticipated research or development of the employer; or" Which for larger companies, is huge. Admittedly though, this is the thing that employees always seem to miss in that labor code. "These protections don't help…

is there case law on prospective area of business?

Re: GitHub lets staff own IP developed for personal projects using company resources

#246

Post by dotnetisnotdead »

strictnein wrote: post #224
shawnee_ wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The result is that contract forms have become a sort of IP-free zone. Exactly. One of the sleaziest tricks used by Realtors (most Realtors are not lawyers) is getting clients to sign their forms: their terms usually have the word "percent" hard-coded into the contract. Rather than opening the door to hourly or fixed dollar amounts, they insist that their forms are the "standard". I heard one recently say in a public…

Every time I buy or sell a home, I'm very thankful that one of my friends has a realtor's license. None of that 7% BS. None of the dumb games they play. How it came about that the services of two realtors was worth $35k on a $500k home is beyond me. Especially in this day and age, where we all just look online and tell our realtors what houses we want to go to. Half the work they used to do is now done by the client.

I would have to disagree. Yes, much of what they do as far as finding houses can be done online these days, but there are many edge cases where a (good) realtor can save you.

When I first purchased a home my credit history was.. interesting. The value the realtor provided was putting me in touch with the right grants, forms, etc and ways to build and fix my credit. They helped me not get scammed with a high interest or ARM loan. Their knowledge helped me. Also she steered me away from a couple houses due to inspection concerns that would have cost me time.

Fast forward to now my credit is awesome, the homes I can afford are in a far different category and my last home purchase was fairly routine, so my realtor didn't do as much but I still value their knowledge and experience because you won't need it until you need it.

Re: GitHub lets staff own IP developed for personal projects using company resources

#247

Post by DannyBee »

awinter-py wrote: post #245
DannyBee wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"These states already assign employees work 'not using equipment', 'not resulting from work', 'not in the employer's area of business'." This is close but no cigar: You missed " or actual or demonstrably anticipated research or development of the employer; or" Which for larger companies, is huge. Admittedly though, this is the thing that employees always seem to miss in that labor code. "These protections don't help…

is there case law on prospective area of business?

Honestly, not really. Most of the cases that get brought are resolved fairly quickly, from what i can see.

In particular, the ones actually between employee and employer, employees tend to lose except when it is very clear cut. IE if employer's interpretation of their R&D, etc, is not crazy, they tend to win.

So if employee's has idea for juicing oranges, and works for skateboarding company, employee's probably gonna win.

If employee has idea for juicing oranges, and works for blender company looking into other things, employee's gonna lose, even if employee didn't know about it, etc.

But there's also a lot of cases out there that are just proxy wars between companies where a claim about IP ownership gets tacked on. These don't usually make for useful caselaw.

Re: GitHub lets staff own IP developed for personal projects using company resources

#248

Post by rootsudo »

shawnee_ wrote: post #179
matthewmcg wrote: post #137

I work at a large law firm that represents a lot of software companies. Our standard employee agreement forms have the usual default (company owns everything you create with its resources or that relates to the scope of your employment). This default has always amused me because lawyers never sign these kinds of agreements with their own law firms . We spend most of our time writing contracts, memos, and other bits o…

The result is that contract forms have become a sort of IP-free zone. Exactly. One of the sleaziest tricks used by Realtors (most Realtors are not lawyers) is getting clients to sign their forms: their terms usually have the word "percent" hard-coded into the contract. Rather than opening the door to hourly or fixed dollar amounts, they insist that their forms are the "standard". I heard one recently say in a public…

As someone looking to purchase, thank you for this tidbit.

Re: GitHub lets staff own IP developed for personal projects using company resources

#249

Post by codazoda »

shawnee_ wrote: post #179
matthewmcg wrote: post #137

I work at a large law firm that represents a lot of software companies. Our standard employee agreement forms have the usual default (company owns everything you create with its resources or that relates to the scope of your employment). This default has always amused me because lawyers never sign these kinds of agreements with their own law firms . We spend most of our time writing contracts, memos, and other bits o…

The result is that contract forms have become a sort of IP-free zone. Exactly. One of the sleaziest tricks used by Realtors (most Realtors are not lawyers) is getting clients to sign their forms: their terms usually have the word "percent" hard-coded into the contract. Rather than opening the door to hourly or fixed dollar amounts, they insist that their forms are the "standard". I heard one recently say in a public…

What does everyone think about Homie and how they try to tackle this with a flat fee?

https://www.homie.com

Re: GitHub lets staff own IP developed for personal projects using company resources

#250

Post by awinter-py »

DannyBee wrote: post #247
awinter-py wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is there case law on prospective area of business?

Honestly, not really. Most of the cases that get brought are resolved fairly quickly, from what i can see. In particular, the ones actually between employee and employer, employees tend to lose except when it is very clear cut. IE if employer's interpretation of their R&D, etc, is not crazy, they tend to win. So if employee's has idea for juicing oranges, and works for skateboarding company, employee's probably gonna…

You're a dev+lawyer with large company experience -- if you were writing a federal law on employee IP assignment, what would it look like?
Post reply on HN