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

Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg

ajayjapan.posterous.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 47 posts

Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg

#2

Post by ntolia »

Unfortunately, the blog post is somewhat flawed. In the CA law he references, it clearly states that the exception to you owning your code/ideas is if they "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."

While IANAL, the consensus on a number of websites is that, while working for a tech startup, anything that you do in your free time could technically belong to the company you work for as its related to your "employer's business."

Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg

#4

Post by boucher »

ntolia wrote: post #2

Unfortunately, the blog post is somewhat flawed. In the CA law he references, it clearly states that the exception to you owning your code/ideas is if they "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." While IANAL, the consensus on a number of websites is that, while working for a…

You're misreading the law. As an example, if you work for a software company that makes iPhone games, and you write an iPhone game in your spare time and with your own resources, that game could be at risk of being owned by your employer. If, however, instead of making an iPhone game you make a photo sharing website, there's very little risk that your work could be owned by your employer.

There are obviously lots of gray areas in between. If you're planning to try and make money off something you built in your spare time, you should talk to a lawyer.

Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg

#5

Post by Dornkirk »

ntolia wrote: post #2

Unfortunately, the blog post is somewhat flawed. In the CA law he references, it clearly states that the exception to you owning your code/ideas is if they "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." While IANAL, the consensus on a number of websites is that, while working for a…

By chance do you (or anyone) know what the law is regarding side-projects in Illinois?

Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg

#6

Post by songexe »

I'm reminded of Joel (Spolsky's) excellent commentary on this matter.

http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/19422/if-im-working-...

tl;dr from the post:

"So... to answer your question. There is unlikely to be substantial difference between the contracts that you sign at various companies in the US working as a programmer or in the law that applies."

Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg

#9

Post by nbpoole »

boucher wrote: post #4
ntolia wrote: post #2

Unfortunately, the blog post is somewhat flawed. In the CA law he references, it clearly states that the exception to you owning your code/ideas is if they "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." While IANAL, the consensus on a number of websites is that, while working for a…

You're misreading the law. As an example, if you work for a software company that makes iPhone games, and you write an iPhone game in your spare time and with your own resources, that game could be at risk of being owned by your employer. If, however, instead of making an iPhone game you make a photo sharing website, there's very little risk that your work could be owned by your employer. There are obviously lots of…

As you pointed out, it's a gray area.

http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/19422/if-im-working-...

"Not related to your employer's line of work. Um, wait. What's the definition of related? If my employer is Microsoft, they do everything. They made a goddamn BARNEY PLUSH TOY with a computer in it once. Are plush toys related? Obviously operating systems, compilers, desktop applications, search engines, and games are related to Microsoft's line of work. Hmmm."

"This ambiguity is meant to create enough of a chilling effect on the employee working in their spare time that for all intents and purposes it achieves the effect that the employer wants: the employee doesn't bother doing any side projects that might turn into a business some day, and the employer gets a nice, refreshed employee coming to work in the morning after spending the previous evening watching TV."

Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg

#10

Post by ntolia »

boucher wrote: post #4
ntolia wrote: post #2

Unfortunately, the blog post is somewhat flawed. In the CA law he references, it clearly states that the exception to you owning your code/ideas is if they "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." While IANAL, the consensus on a number of websites is that, while working for a…

You're misreading the law. As an example, if you work for a software company that makes iPhone games, and you write an iPhone game in your spare time and with your own resources, that game could be at risk of being owned by your employer. If, however, instead of making an iPhone game you make a photo sharing website, there's very little risk that your work could be owned by your employer. There are obviously lots of…

The gray areas were exactly my point. There are sometimes clear-cut cases but generally things can be very vague to us non-lawyer types.

Look at this earlier HN thread for more info - http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2208056 . It talks about all the potential ramifications and that one should almost always talk to a lawyer.

Post reply on HN