It's not a problem for small projects that you don't intend to do anything interesting with. However it still sucks because you never know if some widget library you create, even if you create in secret without your name on it, suddenly makes a $1MM. What happens the name your name gets leaked that you are the main project contributor. Will some lawyer at the companies you worked on for the last 10 years be looking at monetizing your work?
Google claims copyright on employee side projects
291–300 of 399 posts
Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects
#292Oh, please. It's standard industry practice for companies to claim ownership of everything a software engineer comes up with, even "on their own time". The problem is it's extremely difficult to say, figure out when someone might have invented some super clever idea which can be pantented "on their own time". This was true when I worked for MIT, VA Linux, IBM, and Google. At VA Linux it was the VC's which insisted on…
This type of commentary only serves to move the progressive goalpost closer towards the conservative (imho also the regressive side) of the debate.
Yes everyone does it. But is that ok? To suggest so, is to suggest there is no better alternative. This thinking ultimate leads to it's predicted outcome, not because of any sort of prescience, but out of the lack of will to use the available light to find a better way out.
Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects
#293Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can confirm from my experience (~10 years in the industry). I've never even heard of this practice until I applied to Google. None of the EU companies I've worked at before had anything like this. None of the EU companies I've worked at since had anything like this. It's US imperialism, nothing less.
Without diving into the ins-and-outs of this, my current contract contains a claim like this. Well outside the US, and the UK/EU - it's in South East Asia. It says something like "on company equipment" and/or "reasonably related to skills/knowledge gained or applicable during employment with the company". So I wouldn't quite quote this as being US imperialism. I seem to recall similar clauses in my previous contracts…
Suppose you learn Japanese at work ... can't you use that knowledge in the field?
Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects
#294One of the things I remember from my amazon employment is a similar draconian policy which is also overbearing due to the fact that Amazon wants to sell everything from all birds knock offs to scaleable databases.
One thing I thought was particular heavy handed was that the policy also stated that in addition to general fears of amazon claiming ownership of your project, if you needed some kind of cloud service, it required you use AWS for those services.
Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects
#295> usbmuxd (iPhone USB comms daemon)...was rejected without an explanation
This is development of a tool that helps a competitor's product. And it's not like Android was a random side project no one knew about. This, and developing an iOS app, are the border of doing work that's against Google's interests.
Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects
#296Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If Google really wanted to screw people over, they could, but that doesn't seem to be happening. But again > I ended up having to hand over maintainership of usbmuxd. What's your personal criteria for getting screwed over? From my perspective, it already happened with OP.
I mean like take ownership of a project or start up based on a technicality. Taking someone's app money would be another one. I don't think that making someone else maintain your project is unreasonable, especially if that someone can be a mysterious anon that comes in at the right time.
The "maintainerr" is the "owner" in this context.
Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects
#297> Oh, please. It's standard industry practice for companies to claim ownership of everything a software engineer comes up with, even "on their own time". In the US. Problem is the US is infecting the rest of the world too, especially through subsidiaries which basically just translate from English the 'standard' employment contract. I had to refuse employment in Romania since the clauses were so broad and basically i…
Most of the places I've worked at, this is standard practice if stuff you're developing is on their time and they're paying you.
I have gotten around this by having a list of side-projects I'm working on that give a brief description of what they are and that the business has no claim on them. I attach this to the contract/NDA as an addendum in order to protect myself. I have yet to have a company make a claim on anything I've ever put on the list.
As far as multi-year NDA's, I work in a state where these rarely if ever hold up. The only limitations in these is if you're going to work for a direct competitor. Which means if you're a Ford engineer and you're going to work for Chevy. Then the courts could ban you from working at Chevy for a few years, but your company can't keep you from being gainfully employed anywhere. If you're able to be employed as an engineer elsewhere, it will hold up in court. But trying to keep someone from working in their chosen field at another company doesn't go well in court.
I had one incident with a company who tried that and I took them to court. First day judge just laughed and told the company attorney that you can't legally keep someone from being gainfully employed just because you want to keep them from working at another company that also develops software. A few objections from the company's attorney got struck down immediately and I was out of there in a less than an hour.
Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects
#298> Oh, please. It's standard industry practice for companies to claim ownership of everything a software engineer comes up with, even "on their own time". In the US. Problem is the US is infecting the rest of the world too, especially through subsidiaries which basically just translate from English the 'standard' employment contract. I had to refuse employment in Romania since the clauses were so broad and basically i…
There are certain things employers put in their contracts even though they know 100% it is non enforceable due to being illegal etc. Years ago when I was an employee it was common practice in IT(in UK) to have a non-compete clause in your employment contract that said: "if you leave you can't work for a competition for 6-12 months". When I looked into it I found out statements like this are unenforceable under UK law…
This is all well and good, until you end your employment at a firm that is extremely vengeful, and as a deterrent to other employees, does in fact decide to take you to court and make your life miserable for several months. Because, remember; you don't have to be guilty to be dragged into court.
Having worked for one such company, who made a spectacle out of punishing disloyal former employees way past the point of what the legal system is built for (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18499712 ), and then holding staff meetings to announce how they've just destroyed that employees life (he wasn't the first, and while he actually did break the law, it's very Arguable the Quadrature guys did not), I took the safe choice sitting out my non compete period and took a nice long holiday.
I'll repeat the most important part of this story;
You don't have to be guilty to be dragged into court.
Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects
#299Oh, please. It's standard industry practice for companies to claim ownership of everything a software engineer comes up with, even "on their own time". The problem is it's extremely difficult to say, figure out when someone might have invented some super clever idea which can be pantented "on their own time". This was true when I worked for MIT, VA Linux, IBM, and Google. At VA Linux it was the VC's which insisted on…
I recently joined Google and have a general purpose Apache-licensed Java library which I submitted and was rejected for overlap. This seemed fair since they also have similar projects (e.g. Guava) even though I don't work on them (or even write Java there). I can still contribute to the project and will be able to use that code forever since it is also Apache, I just won't hold copyright and therefore wouldn't be able to relicense it without their permission, but that's not a concern of mine so I've been happily hacking away on it.
I also submitted a new side project, which obtained copyright release quickly (couple days) and without any additional qualifications, which was nice as I could then proceed freely with it.
Overall I'm pretty happy with the process and thought it and the rules around it were fair.
Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects
#300Oh, please. It's standard industry practice for companies to claim ownership of everything a software engineer comes up with, even "on their own time". The problem is it's extremely difficult to say, figure out when someone might have invented some super clever idea which can be pantented "on their own time". This was true when I worked for MIT, VA Linux, IBM, and Google. At VA Linux it was the VC's which insisted on…
Depends on where you live - it's not normal.