Nothing is stopping NYC startups & employees from drafting an appropriate contract to make ownership of side-project work belong to the employee.
Why would any employer agree to that?
Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg
21–30 of 47 posts
Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg
#22Nothing is stopping NYC startups & employees from drafting an appropriate contract to make ownership of side-project work belong to the employee.
No one is going to ask, before the first day on the job, for that kind of alteration to the standard employment contract. They're very likely to lose the offer. Talking about side projects before the first week of work is not a good career move, especially if you're young (22-24) and have no leverage at all. Add to this that the side project problem isn't relevant for many people, and people can't predict 5-10 years…
I used to have this attitude as well that I couldn't ask for stuff and no one would agree, I gave it up, started approaching things earnestly and honestly and it's amazing the things people will do if you ask them in a respectful and polite manner.
Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg
#23Has anyone with a successful w/e project been successfully sued over this in NY state and lost?
Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg
#24Nothing is stopping NYC startups & employees from drafting an appropriate contract to make ownership of side-project work belong to the employee.
No one is going to ask, before the first day on the job, for that kind of alteration to the standard employment contract. They're very likely to lose the offer. Talking about side projects before the first week of work is not a good career move, especially if you're young (22-24) and have no leverage at all. Add to this that the side project problem isn't relevant for many people, and people can't predict 5-10 years…
You do have to push hard though, its extra legal work for them and so they'll deter you mainly for that reason.
Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one is going to ask, before the first day on the job, for that kind of alteration to the standard employment contract. They're very likely to lose the offer. Talking about side projects before the first week of work is not a good career move, especially if you're young (22-24) and have no leverage at all. Add to this that the side project problem isn't relevant for many people, and people can't predict 5-10 years…
This presumes you're desperate for work, those that get stuff done have no problem, they approach the business forthrightly and tell them this is what I'm working on, and I want it to be mine. If a business has an objection to a person owning the rights to their work, then you can tell your signing up for indentured servitude rather than employment. It's not a place you want to work for anyway. I used to have this at…
I actually think it's best, as a general principle, not to work on side projects while employed. If the side project really is a side project (i.e. it's unrelated to your work and therefore something you justly own) you'll do a much better job of it if you work on it full-time. The side project and the day job usually both suffer if you try to serve two masters. But there are cases to which this principle doesn't apply (i.e. an iPhone app that doesn't take much time to build but becomes very popular) and it's for those that we need (in NY) better laws.
Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg
#26I think the real issue with Silicon Alley (having been a part of the scene since the early 90s) is that Wall Street still swallows quite a bit of the top tech talent — that with a super high overhead can get in your way. It's better than it was years ago, but that's more of the big issue for NYC as I see it.
Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg
#27Unfortunately, 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?
The IEEE put out a publication that gives a solid overview of the differences in state laws; it mentions Illinois law specifically in a few places and includes a citation to Illinois statues that you can consult:
Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg
#28Nothing is stopping NYC startups & employees from drafting an appropriate contract to make ownership of side-project work belong to the employee.
No one is going to ask, before the first day on the job, for that kind of alteration to the standard employment contract. They're very likely to lose the offer. Talking about side projects before the first week of work is not a good career move, especially if you're young (22-24) and have no leverage at all. Add to this that the side project problem isn't relevant for many people, and people can't predict 5-10 years…
Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would any employer agree to that?
Why would any employer agree to pay a salary above minimum wage?
Libertarian arguments like this which stress contracts often seem to fall flat by the following reasoning:
1 We seem to agree on what the desired outcome is.
2 If contract theory fails here, the outcome is undesirable.
3 If contract theory succeeds, the outcome is identical to what we would have achieved with legislation.
4 A legislative solution doesn't carry with it the uncertainly that a contractual solution would.
∴ Legislation seems preferable.
You have to know what outcome you want to effect of course, and be reasonably sure your legislation will achieve that. In this case we see (or at least strongly suspect) that when companies are not allowed to own IP produced by their employees independent of company resources and unrelated to their business, the financial benefit to the employee and the benefit to society in economic growth far exceed the benefit to the company (in most cases this benefit is zero). If there were a wider range of solutions I would not support legislation (or possibly I would support narrower legislation), but that doesn't seem to be the case. So I support legislation.
Re: Why NYC is not Palo Alto cc: MikeBloomberg
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would any employer agree to that?
I find it hard to believe that it would be an unreasonable request that any work you do outside of the office, on a personal machine, and not utilizing any company IP be under your ownership. If such an issue does turn into a sticking point during negotiations, you should strongly consider that a red flag.