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

251–260 of 484 posts

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

#251

Post by danvasquez29 »

dotnetisnotdead wrote: post #246
strictnein wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

not arguing against there being value, but there are credit rehab companies that would have probably cost you a lot less than the realtor's commission. Many basic credit consulting services are free.

I bought a home recently and work in the mortgage industry. My opinion: the buyer's agent should be a flat negotiated fee, maybe an hourly rate. There is very little that most do that the buyer can't do themselves. If the buyer doesn't want to do it themselves, then that's a choice they make to pay, and for items like inspection reviewing and negotiating, I'm not sure I see why it's significantly different if I'm buying a $200k house vs an $800k house. I don't agree with their fees being a percentage of the home prices.

Seller's agents on the other hand...those guys are salesmen. I can see way more value in incentivizing that person to get maximum value for me.

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

#252

Post by elastic_church »

dspillett wrote: post #209
elastic_church wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes I just go with it because of how unenforceable that contract will be for them and how Ill get paid in the meantime laughing silently to myself at the absurdity

Depending on how vicious the company is when "crossed" you might find they can make it expensive for you for a while by trying to enforce it and making you put resource into fighting back. Personally, if I don't agree with and and/or aren't willing to stand by it, I don't sign it. Of course for some less fortunate desperation means they have to compromise on such ideals.

right thats something to consider

there's just so many ways around it and I'd LOVE to get some case law made just to get some unknowns clarified. Like when I contribute to an already existing open source project on company's time/resource/IP-appropriation-regime, do they get to rewrite the Apache license because one contributor had signed a contract? when running this open source software that happens to generate a transferable token with a liquid secondary market with no proof of ownership, is that the company's?

would love some broke startup to spend time on that case

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

#253

Post by adanto6840 »

rtkwe wrote: post #238
danielweber wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you get a lawyer for your house transactions, you will pay a flat fee of less than $1000 and still get the advice to always have it inspected.

Here in North Carolina the buyers realtor fees are entirely paid by the seller so there's really no reason not to get one. Ours was really helpful in getting things lined up and providing checklists and support when we had questions.

If the seller stands to pay your agent 3% of the sale proceeds, the seller will typically be happy to reduce the price by 3% if you don't have an agent.

I just sold a condo in Minneapolis using a flat fee company -- fantastic experience and will never use a realtor again, save for maybe if looking internationally in a very unfamiliar area perhaps.

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

#254

Post by danvasquez29 »

JangoSteve wrote: post #221
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…

> I've been trying for a long time to alter the common perception that Realtors add value; they don't. I've heard this before, but when we bought a house, our realtor added a ton of value. She went out and found houses that we wouldn't have found; sure, most of them came from MLS, but there were a few she found just by driving by or by asking fellow agents. She even triaged a couple for us (by going to look at them w…

all of that you either could have done yourself, or your inspector would have done for you.

I don't begrudge anyone who wants to pay someone else to take a task off their hands, I do it all the time with various things like my lawn service, housekeeper, etc. But was the time they saved you worth the commission they made? When you're making 7% of the selling price, the answer to that seems likely to be no in many cases. There's a price point where it's no longer worth it to outsource the work, and I suspect many home buyers run over it without realizing it or considering they have a choice.

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

#255

Post by nso »

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…

Sold my apartment myself without involving realtors. They wanted what amounted to 10% of what I made on the sale.

It was a bit of work getting everything right, but it was well worth it.

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

#256

Post by nso »

lsaferite wrote: post #161
Dayshine wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>so any one client 'firing' you is suddenly not a huge thing With 3 months notice and strong union protection (public sector) it already isn't. I'd much rather work for a single excellent organisation where I know I'm doing good than many who can't hold on to good staff and need contractors.

I'd love those protections personally, but I have no such luck.

It's minimum requirement for a hire contract in Norway. 3 months mutual notification, and only in a few cases can you be fired on spot without compensation (theft and such). You can contractually increase the notification time from the baseline, but not decrease.

Makes for happy and productive workers, and also benefits companies who don't have to worry about loosing their best worker without notice.

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

#257

Post by dang »

kutkloon7 wrote: post #113

I agree, and I think that people should be able to make the distinction between legally correct and morally correct. (It's very easy to make a Godwin here) Is it that uncommon to factor in the situation? I've heard of judges in the Netherlands who find people guilty, but give them just a small fine. Likewise, they might rule that technically , someone is guilty, but that this application of the law is not in the spir…

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13921849 and marked it off-topic.

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

#258

Post by gknoy »

JangoSteve wrote: post #221
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…

> I've been trying for a long time to alter the common perception that Realtors add value; they don't. I've heard this before, but when we bought a house, our realtor added a ton of value. She went out and found houses that we wouldn't have found; sure, most of them came from MLS, but there were a few she found just by driving by or by asking fellow agents. She even triaged a couple for us (by going to look at them w…

My house-buying experiences were similar. Our realtor did a LOT of things that we might not have thought to do, or known to look for, or at least not in the time frame we had. Lots of sanity-hand-holding, too.

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

#259

Post by kbenson »

danvasquez29 wrote: post #251
dotnetisnotdead wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

not arguing against there being value, but there are credit rehab companies that would have probably cost you a lot less than the realtor's commission. Many basic credit consulting services are free. I bought a home recently and work in the mortgage industry. My opinion: the buyer's agent should be a flat negotiated fee, maybe an hourly rate. There is very little that most do that the buyer can't do themselves. If th…

> he buyer's agent should be a flat negotiated fee, maybe an hourly rate.

A fee sounds good, an hourly rate seems to incentivize the wrong behavior (as does a percentage of the sale price).

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

#260

Post by paulddraper »

rtkwe wrote: post #238
danielweber wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you get a lawyer for your house transactions, you will pay a flat fee of less than $1000 and still get the advice to always have it inspected.

Here in North Carolina the buyers realtor fees are entirely paid by the seller so there's really no reason not to get one. Ours was really helpful in getting things lined up and providing checklists and support when we had questions.

That is typical across the US.

The price is 6% higher than the actual value, so that the buying and selling realtors get their cut.

But if you don't have a buying realtor, any offer you make it looks 3% higher to the seller, and you can recoup most or all of that.

Post reply on HN