Live data from Hacker News

Google Tried to Patent My Work After a Job Interview

patentpandas.org

471–480 of 510 posts

Re: Google Tried to Patent My Work After a Job Interview

#471
post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've banned this account for using HN primarily for ideological battle. Also for repeatedly posting flamebait and ignoring our requests to stop. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Can you point me to the requests to stop? I've seen exactly one, a long time ago. I'm not personally attacking people, and I do contribute here with a positive upvote score. I don't see the issue.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18504457

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17807056

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17767666

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17486112

But the main issue is using HN primarily for ideological or political battle. That's directly against the spirit of this site, and destroys it more insidiously than incivility does.

Positive vote scores, alas, aren't an indicator of whether comments are good for HN or not. The most indignant and ideological comments routinely get upvoted. That's one reason they're insidious.

Re: Google Tried to Patent My Work After a Job Interview

#472
I have heard (so very anecdotal, not confirmed), but similar stories from folks who worked with Google (not for Google).

Google would reach to incumbent telephone/infrastructure companies and tell them that they want to use their services for some super project. To get well integrated, Google, of course need to know the details/idiosyncrasy of the existing protocols/work around conventions/etc.

So Google employees would receive all the documentation, knowledge/know-how that they could extract.

Then the project would get 'cancelled'. And then, some time later, the 'service provider' would find that Google is implementing similar capabilities that their service is providing, only as part of their some other global initiative that aims at converting majority of infrastructure services to Google.

Perhaps these stories are a reflection of the internal culture characteristic of the 'Do-more-swindle' company.

I see people below recommend NDA/etc. Sure, but US/UK legal system is heavily tilted towards who can hire better lawyers -- and the monopolies win there easily....

Re: Google Tried to Patent My Work After a Job Interview

#473

I met/had a similar experience with Google ATAP in 2013 (was Motorala ATAP then; Google recently bought them) though not for a job interview but to discuss working together to build our tech SpeakerBlast into the Moto X. They asked if we ever thought about selling our technology to them before the meeting and at the meeting they baited us for how our tech worked saying we'd like to work with you tell us how it works.…

“Don't be evil"? Let's see if there's an uproar by Google employees this time. My bet is on "fat chance".

Considering all the other corporate strategies Google employees have taken a public stand on lately, I wouldn't be surprised if there were serious fatigue on both ends - on corporate, for dealing with the constant rebellions killing major revenue sources (ex:- project maven's death being the end of any more government contracts); and for employees, who are likely sick of protesting an endless stream of obviously bad stuff while risking career alienation (ex:- dragonfly).

What's not immediately publicly evident is the opportunity cost vis a vis attrition and new hires - how many people have left from disillusionment? How many prospective employees are actively shunning Google directly because of these policies? (While a number might provide explicit feedback to recruiters about their reasons to reject, it's probable a silent majority is silently avoiding all contacts from Google recruiting.) At least personally speaking, I had a vastly more positive view of google around 2012 when I started grad school (more or less my dream company to work for at the time) than what I had when graduating (sufficient to decline any recruiting requests).

Re: Google Tried to Patent My Work After a Job Interview

#474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you've been visiting other offices from the one I've been visiting, the agreement pretty much says: * No taking photographs or video without permission. * Don't disclose things you see in the office outside the office It's literally 3 sentences, and they have handy little icons next to each. I see nothing about IP rights assignment or anything of the sort.

But different companies use different forms of visitor NDA — and lawyers purely love to load up contract forms with "protective" language to show how knowledgeable they are. This can be dangerous to counterparties; Stanford, in effect, lost part-ownership of a patent for HIV diagnostic testing because a Stanford investigator signed a visitor NDA that included IP-assignment language [0]. The case went all the way to t…

Your comment is incredibly misleading. This wasn't the "you came by our office for lunch" NDA. This was the "you worked here for a while, and we trained you and taught you our techniques, which you later used in an invention" NDA.

Re: Google Tried to Patent My Work After a Job Interview

#475
post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> She has an impressive resume. > Why would she do something like this? Because the latter may be the reason for the former

As a result of many real world experiences I've started to see ridiculously impressive looking resumes as a contrarian indicator. When I see a resume that cites multiple company foundings, dozens of patents, dozens of projects, etc. I know the person is either stealing or taking credit for others work or just padding their resume in the more conventional sense. It says this person is a liar, exaggerator, narcissist,…

Well said! The old adage; "if something seems too good to be true; it probably is" is a truism. The outliers are very few. The Internet is used to amplify every small exaggeration and falsehood into banner headlines and for some reason even sane people default to believing them. Being sceptical takes effort while belief is wired into our DNA.

Re: Google Tried to Patent My Work After a Job Interview

#476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a level of douchiness I cannot fathom. What possesses these people to act in this fashion and how do they sleep at night? How is this not seen as clearly unethical behavior? A clear violation of Wheaton's Law, here. I mean... I could easily take that lollipop from that naïve baby in that baby carriage... but I don't, simply because I'm Not A Dick™. Did all of Silicon Valley get the wrong takeaway from the App…

Why do people carry out muggings? Because they gain from it. Morality and legality aren't just divergent - they're orthogonal . Just like one can perform moral and immoral actions in physical space, one can perform moral or immoral actions using the legal system. Despite the goal of the legal system being to punish immoral behavior, being able to actually formalize that is up against the limit of complexity - as soon…

Great comment. Is this a fundamental limit? The justice system itself pricing most people out of justice. A reasonable judge could make the the OP whole, and discourage attacks. But access to that judge is far, far too expensive.

In the absence of a working justice system, are we helpless? Mostly, yes. But Google's reputation will take a big hit here, rightly so. Ideally, the individuals involved at Google would also take a big reputation hit. In an ideal world when they apply for a job, these individuals will be rejected for their immoral, unethical behavior.

Re: Google Tried to Patent My Work After a Job Interview

#477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But different companies use different forms of visitor NDA — and lawyers purely love to load up contract forms with "protective" language to show how knowledgeable they are. This can be dangerous to counterparties; Stanford, in effect, lost part-ownership of a patent for HIV diagnostic testing because a Stanford investigator signed a visitor NDA that included IP-assignment language [0]. The case went all the way to t…

Your comment is incredibly misleading. This wasn't the "you came by our office for lunch" NDA. This was the "you worked here for a while, and we trained you and taught you our techniques, which you later used in an invention" NDA.

> This wasn't the "you came by our office for lunch" NDA. This was the "you worked here for a while, and we trained you and taught you our techniques, which you later used in an invention" NDA.

Citation for the first assertion? Here's an excerpt from the Supreme Court's summary of the facts: One Dr. Mark Holodniy [0], who had recently joined a Stanford lab as a fellow, "signed a Visitor's Confidentiality Agreement (VCA). That agreement stated that Holodniy "will assign and do[es] hereby assign" to Cetus [predecessor to Roche] his "right, title and interest in each of the ideas, inventions and improvements" made "as a consequence of [his] access" to Cetus." [1] The trial court's opinion [2] states that Holodniy signed the VCA "[a]t the time he began working at Cetus"; it wouldn't be the least bit surprising if he did so without first getting the VCA reviewed by the Stanford legal department, because after all it's just an NDA, right?

Yes, the Stanford fellow worked at Cetus for nine months learning various techniques — which were published — and, months later, used (at least some of) the techniques when working with his Stanford colleagues.

The point is that a relatively-junior Stanford employee — as a result of having signed another organization's "Visitor Confidentiality Agreement" — in effect gave the other organization a get-out-of-jail-free card: The other organization was allowed to infringe Stanford's patent on a later invention by other Stanford investigators because the junior employee's own contribution to that invention qualified as a "consequence" of the employee's previous training at the other organization.

> Your comment is incredibly misleading.

You're entitled to your opinion, of course. The lesson is still valid: RTFA before you sign it — because otherwise you might be giving away valuable rights months or years down the road.

[0] https://profiles.stanford.edu/mark-holodniy

[1] https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=145195436028699....

[2] https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=776650368736548...

Re: Google Tried to Patent My Work After a Job Interview

#478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a level of douchiness I cannot fathom. What possesses these people to act in this fashion and how do they sleep at night? How is this not seen as clearly unethical behavior? A clear violation of Wheaton's Law, here. I mean... I could easily take that lollipop from that naïve baby in that baby carriage... but I don't, simply because I'm Not A Dick™. Did all of Silicon Valley get the wrong takeaway from the App…

You are a Nice Guy (TM) but business is business it's actually not a bad thing that it's one of the few places you can actually be an asshole without feeling bad for it though

Business can be respectful, honorable and still successful, so that phrase is mostly a lame blanket excuse to not put in effort towards such goals.

And, sorry, but it's hard to escape the indicative aspect of liking the oportunity to be "an asshole without feeling bad about it"...

Re: Google Tried to Patent My Work After a Job Interview

#479

I met/had a similar experience with Google ATAP in 2013 (was Motorala ATAP then; Google recently bought them) though not for a job interview but to discuss working together to build our tech SpeakerBlast into the Moto X. They asked if we ever thought about selling our technology to them before the meeting and at the meeting they baited us for how our tech worked saying we'd like to work with you tell us how it works.…

This is a theft. They should be in prison.

Re: Google Tried to Patent My Work After a Job Interview

#480
post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

bUt bUt...ChInA dOeS iP tHeFt

We've banned this account for using HN primarily for ideological battle. Also for repeatedly posting flamebait and ignoring our requests to stop. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

at least in this case, they aren't wrong. on hacker news, there is a strong bias towards how silicon valley likes to operate and against china.
Post reply on HN