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

Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

penguindreams.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 295 posts

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#161

Post by joezydeco »

dbbk wrote: post #45
stupidcar wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy shit. That is way, WAY crazier than a non-compete. That is saying you can't work at all for a year after your employment terminates, because anything you produce during that time is presumed to have actually been created during your previous employment, and so belongs to your ex-employer. Even if you go and work for a non-competing company in a completely different field, and invent something totally unrelated t…

I would just return this back to them and ask, "why?"

Regretfully the negotiations didn't get far enough to get to this point, although I told them I would have to discuss things with a lawyer if they wanted it signed. Then we would have at least had a "why" to go with it.

Thankfully the deal fell apart for other reasons, although I shouldn't have been surprised by any of it.

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#162

Post by Zeitgeschehen »

Diederich wrote: post #131
biztos wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Germany that clause would mean they'd have to pay you your full salary for as long as they prevented you from working for someone else. So it'd be a one-year vacation whenever your employment ended, but probably not much use for your career.

That's pretty interesting. Do you think someone in Germany under such an agreement could work for another company that had no presence in Germany or, perhaps, the EU?

That would be fine because that someone would not be a competitor of the company. Although you have to consider that if you earn money while being paid through such an agreement your earnings are partly deducted from them. So if you find a job which pays the same as before, your old company will only need to pay until your income reaches 110%(125% if you moved for your new job) of your old income. You are also not allowed to "maliciously refrain" from working in that time. (But that is interpreted quite lax for the employee)

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#163

Post by njarboe »

What this author misses is that California also has a law[1] that makes unenforceable contracts that claim ownership of anything employees do on their own time with their own equipment. Passed in 1979 (amended 1991). I think other places hoping to create "Silicon $X" need to put anti-non-compete and this law in place to even have a possibility to create a similar culture to the Valley.

(a) Any provision in an employment agreement which provides that an employee shall assign, or offer to assign, any of his or her rights in an invention to his or her employer shall not apply to an invention that the employee developed entirely on his or her own time without using the employer’s equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information except for those inventions that either:

(1) Relate at the time of conception or reduction to practice of the invention to the employer’s business, or actual or demonstrably anticipated research or development of the employer; or

(2) Result from any work performed by the employee for the employer.

(b) To the extent a provision in an employment agreement purports to require an employee to assign an invention otherwise excluded from being required to be assigned under subdivision (a), the provision is against the public policy of this state and is unenforceable.

[1]https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio....

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#164

Post by fencepost »

agmcleod wrote: post #23

I think the only non compete i've had was for one of my 4-month co-op jobs. I think it lasted only a few months, and it was not to work at a software company in the same field. Which was fine, as I would be at school during that time anyways. I have signed agreements where anything I do on the company laptop is considered theres. So I just made sure to only use it for work, and put nothing else on it.

> I have signed agreements where anything I do on the company laptop is considered theres. So I just made sure to only use it for work, and put nothing else on it.

That is (or should be) pretty standard both on the company's part and on yours. As someone who spends chunks of his days as an IT admin for clients, work systems should be used for work, personal devices should be personal devices and in addition should not be allowed connection to company/internal wifi.

I'm sure that "you" are the most brilliant and secure flower in the field, but if we don't have and enforce policies against personal use then it gets harder to crack down on Boris in the mailroom who wants to check his personal email on Yandex and download every elf bowling attachment that gets sent his way.

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#165

Post by joezydeco »

ABCLAW wrote: post #155
joezydeco wrote: post #5

So recently I came across an Invention Disclosure agreement that a company wanted me to sign. The phrasing of this kind of threw me off: "I will promptly communicate to the Company each and every invention, discovery or item of intellectual property made or conceived by me, either as an individual or jointly with others, during my period of employment, and I agree that any such invention, discovery or item of intelle…

I don't think this clause is crazy. It feels poorly drafted but this is just a single section of the contract. Who knows if other parts influence the interpretation of this section. With that said: The first segment of this clause is prompt communication to the company of works created. This is so that they'll know whether or not you're seeking IP protections over work-related projects which is reasonable. Nothing he…

Be happy to forward it to you but the issue is moot now, the deal fell through. But I don't recall any other text that influenced this clause, it was just a paranoid expression of their IP as far as I could see.

So that second part: you say "if you disclose work to another individual"...which work would that be? Work that I performed for another employer after termination from the first? Or is that overthinking, and it means work performed for the employer but disclosed after the fact?

I had an ambiguous read about this, which is what threw up the red flags.

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#166

Post by function_seven »

jrs235 wrote: post #160
stupidcar wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy shit. That is way, WAY crazier than a non-compete. That is saying you can't work at all for a year after your employment terminates, because anything you produce during that time is presumed to have actually been created during your previous employment, and so belongs to your ex-employer. Even if you go and work for a non-competing company in a completely different field, and invent something totally unrelated t…

>That is saying you can't work at all for a year after your employment terminates, because anything you produce during that time is presumed to have actually been created during your previous employment, and so belongs to your ex-employer. But it's not. Inventions != copyright or code produced. If I author a book after employment they don't own the rights to my book. If I write code after employment they don't necess…

It's not just inventions, though. The phrase is:

    invention, discovery or item of intellectual property
The "item of intellectual property" would cover copyrighted material, right?

Seems way unenforceable to me, but IANAL.

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#167

Post by boomlinde »

lmkg wrote: post #40
tomohawk wrote: post #2

I've had non-compete agreements provided to me to sign in the past, usually as part of a packet of things to sign. In each case I just pocketed them without signing them. I've never had a company come back later and demand that I sign the thing. If they don't do their diligence, I don't see why I should do it for them. In other words, just because someone puts something in front of you to sign doesn't mean you have t…

(IANAL) Not signing the contract is one thing. Misrepresenting your position is something else. If you gave the impression that you agreed to the terms provided, then it's possible you could be held to those terms. A contract isn't defined by a signature. A contract is defined by a "meeting of the minds." The signature is commonly-accepted evidence that such a thing occurred, but it's not essential. By pocketing the…

If the employer wants the NDA to be part of the agreement, they should include it in the conditions of the employment contract.

If they offer me a separate contract to sign for their non-disclosure terms and I agree neither verbally nor in ink, I think it's a stretch to call it a misrepresentation of my position. Given that this type of contract usually offers absolutely nothing in exchange, it would be more reasonable to assume that I don't agree, if I don't sign it or express agreement otherwise.

Also IANAL, but at the very least I don't think that this is unethical.

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#168

Post by JustSomeNobody »

chadash wrote: post #62

I see a lot of stories/comments about not signing non-compete agreements on HN, so I want to throw in my own 2 cents. Many times, companies have standard paperwork that they want you to sign and they don't want to deal with the hassle of hiring someone who won't sign the forms that their lawyers already drafted. Making modifications means that they have to call up their lawyer (who charges $300+/hour), have a convers…

I worked for a company in field A. They were bought by a PE firm and we were all given three days or out to sign an NDA. I signed. FF a short period of time and I'm negotiating employment at a firm that did work in field B. They had a subsidiary someplace else that happened to do similar work in field A. New company had to have their lawyers draft a letter saying I was not going to work with the subsidiary for the remainder of my NDA before I was officially hired.

New company could easily have just walked away from the deal costing us all a good deal of time. Luckily they really wanted to hire me and didn't.

NDAs are toxic. Don't encourage anyone to sign one.

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#169

Post by joezydeco »

PurpleBoxDragon wrote: post #80
joezydeco wrote: post #5

So recently I came across an Invention Disclosure agreement that a company wanted me to sign. The phrasing of this kind of threw me off: "I will promptly communicate to the Company each and every invention, discovery or item of intellectual property made or conceived by me, either as an individual or jointly with others, during my period of employment, and I agree that any such invention, discovery or item of intelle…

Strike it out and keep going. If it can't be striked out (such as online) just don't sign it. Probably start sending out your resume just in case they force the point, but I would not sign such an clause at all.

This was in a documentation package presented to me as part of a job offer, so it was easy to walk away from.

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#170

Post by boomlinde »

nordsieck wrote: post #69
ethbro wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unethical? It seems ethically equal to a company using their bargaining position to advantage themselves and disadvantage their prospective employees.

> It seems ethically equal to a company using their bargaining position to advantage themselves and disadvantage their prospective employees. You must be unfamiliar with the software development market. In which way do employers have massive market power which renders prospective employees vulnerable? If anything, it seems like developers have the upper hand (perhaps with the exclusion of game developers).

Yes, employers getting people to sign away everything they do after their employment is definitely a sign of them getting the shorter end of the stick...
Post reply on HN