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

An apology to open source

chartjs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 259 posts

Re: An apology to open source

#151

Post by Swinx43 »

analog wrote: post #116
arethuza wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen employment contracts in the UK that try the "own time" thing - these are probably not enforceable, but you probably wouldn't want to go through the process of putting that to the test.

Yup, you'd want to strike out any clauses like that before you signed any employment contract that had them in.

Definitely worth doing that as it is actually a lot more common in the UK for these clauses to be part of any developer's contract than what people realize.

Believe me I had to learn it the hard way.

Re: An apology to open source

#152

Post by yitchelle »

fakeer wrote: post #145
shin_lao wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have only one side of the story. Maybe the company doesn't have the rights on the code and cannot decide to open source it. Maybe they're making money with the code and open sourcing it is killing the business. Maybe they have a procedure before open sourcing code. If tomorrow I wake up with a developer open sourcing part of the work he does for us I would sure be very unhappy. You just can't condone that kind of…

Nick's words: It had been my final year university project I had been working on for a couple of months

True, but "my final year university project" has many different possible explanations, and it is analogous to one of the iPad developer saying that "my project is the iPad" but doesn't mean that the IP belongs to the iPad developer.

Re: An apology to open source

#153

Post by sdfjkl »

slashdotdash wrote: post #127

Some alternative JavaScript charting libraries... * Highcharts JS ( http://www.highcharts.com/ ) * Flot ( http://www.flotcharts.org/ ) * NVD3 ( http://nvd3.org/ ) * morris.js ( http://www.oesmith.co.uk/morris.js/ ) * Rickshaw ( http://code.shutterstock.com/rickshaw/ ) * jqPlot ( http://www.jqplot.com/ ) * gRaphaël ( http://g.raphaeljs.com/ ) * YUI charts ( http://yuilibrary.com/yui/docs/charts/ ) * Polychart.js ( htt…

I've used Highcharts in a commercial inhouse project and can confirm it's awesome, well documented, with a ton of examples and the guy is very responsive to support queries. Well worth the few quid asked for commercial use. Also, it uses SVG and is therefore suitable for PDF conversion (which Canvas is not).

Have a play: http://www.highcharts.com/demo/

Re: An apology to open source

#154

Post by bargl »

nevinera wrote: post #41
yen223 wrote: post #23

Does the company have any jurisdiction over what appears to be Nick's own project? This really sounds ridiculous.

If he's working in the US, then debatably yes. Though 'jurisdiction' isn't the right word. Work performed by an employee during the course of operations is considered 'work for hire', and is the intellectual property of the employer. If he then goes on to replicate a large quantity of that work 'on his own time', he is most likely infringing on that work that he previously did (unless he's very careful about it. Sinc…

> If they'd been real jerks they could have sued him for infringement despite his taking it back down when they asked.

That is a good point. I know we all want to get out the pitchforks and torches, but they may have a legit reason for needing him to take the project down. I can say that I could not open source ANYTHING that was remotely related to work right now, and my current employer has no say in the matter.

Nick seemed to be sad, and disheartened, but not upset at his company and I think he is in the most informed person we have here, so lets take his advice and not form a mob.

Re: An apology to open source

#155

Post by dmacedo »

Let me see if I get it:

Someone exposes code, FOS'ing it (apparently MIT), here comes "the internets", it likes what it sees, exposes to both forks and HN positive comments, along comes employee's manager and cuts the story short, IP issues and whatnot (for JS, really?!)...

The internets will either rename it; rewrite it, use it anyways and ignore the anonymous business, maybe keep the Nick name either associated/thanked or a part of it anyways...

Now the company can either get ready to start some bound-to-loose IP fight over this, which I'm sure has a great ca-ching sound on some poor manager's brain; along with zero chances. Or the business can capitalize on the positive feedback, maybe become a part of a greater good.

I don't get what's so complicated

Re: An apology to open source

#158

Post by darkarmani »

mcherm wrote: post #140
facorreia wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a non-American, that concept is very alien to me. Say, if a burger-flipping cook at a fast-food joint cooks burgers for himself and a few friends at home, is he infringing? Are those burgers company property? Baffled...

Let me explain. My company's employee manual had a clause stating (and I paraphrase here) that any intellectual property (patentable invention, copyrightable materials, etc) created by the employee was owned by the employer. Technically, this means that they own the bedtime stories that I make up for my kids. And certainly any open-source code that I may write in my free time, even if I used absolutely NO company res…

> Let me explain. My company's employee manual had a clause stating (and I paraphrase here) that any intellectual property (patentable invention, copyrightable materials, etc) created by the employee was owned by the employer.

Is that the same manual that starts with the statement: Nothing in here should be construed as a contract?

Re: An apology to open source

#160

Post by bcj »

noonespecial wrote: post #38
nevinera wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not 'hardline dickery'. The company didn't get a lawyer involved and force him to take it down, they expressed concern - the author apparently agrees that it's related or similar to work he did while an employee, or there would have been a bit more argument than "oh, ok". What you're proposing would of course be fine - the company isn't claiming 'ownership' of that code, just suggesting that it might be infrin…

...my fault, should of A-OK'ed everything before putting it online. Didn't expect anywhere near that sort of reaction though. (from the author's twitter feed) Sounds kinda fierce to me. I suspect if he'd refused, lawyers wouldn't be far behind. Perhaps I'm just jaded. I've seen some pretty egregious overstepping by companies in my time. I'm still calling it a dick move. A great deal of what makes him valuable to them…

Didn't Expect anywhere near that sort of reaction though

I read that as reaction to the project by the public (i.e., tons of page views), not as the reaction of his employer. It's quite possible that his company was quite friendly about the issue.

While it's unfortunate to lose an open-source project, there is not enough information to know whether Nick or his employer is the overstepping their bounds.

Post reply on HN