Bumble claims IP rights on employee's open-source libs • Hacker News Board

Re: Bumble claims IP rights on employee's open-source libs

#111

Post by _odey » Sun, Dec 05, 2021, 2:31 PM UTC

StrLght wrote: post #104

_odey wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you be willing to copy paste (redacted if needed) exactly what the "Intellectual Property Rights" section of your contract states right now? I would like to have it on hand to use as a "this is what others have and I want the same", concrete example.

Not OP, but here's the exact words from the contract: >You will give the Company full written details of all Inventions and of all works embodying Intellectual Property Rights made wholly or partially by You at any time during the course of Your Employment (whether or not during working hours or using Company premises or resources) which relate to, or are reasonably capable of being used in, the business of the Compa…

This is great, Thank You!

"which relate to, or are reasonably capable of being used in, the business of the Company or any Group Company" sounds like a good phrasing to me, especially the "business" part of it as I interpret it to be the company simply wanting you to not build a competing product while employed there (a fair thing to have in a contract).

For reference, this is what my last contract had: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24220800 (notably 13.4 (c))

How I see it, "whether or not during working hours or using Company premises or resources" is not problematic here as "or otherwise" was in my block of text since this only refers to the employer's "business" related IP, and not "everything" you create (if your personal work is a stock trading library and your employer sells a booking for dog haircuts SAAS, these won't collide).

Re: Bumble claims IP rights on employee's open-source libs

#112

Post by Silhouette » Sun, Dec 05, 2021, 2:31 PM UTC

masklinn wrote: post #19

Silhouette wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The default position might be something like that but anyone writing software professionally surely has explicit provisions in their employment contract that would take precedence (as long as they hold up to any legal challenge of course).

> as long as they hold up to any legal challenge of course Which they don't because it makes no sense. Transpose to a car mechanic fixing up junkers in their spare time, does the fixed junker belong to the company? Of course not.

I am just relaying information that I've paid money for multiple lawyers to explain to me in the past. If you think they are wrong, an explanation or counterexamples would be helpful.

Re: Bumble claims IP rights on employee's open-source libs

#113

Post by le-mark » Sun, Dec 05, 2021, 2:32 PM UTC

miohtama wrote: post #103

tomxor wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a similar situation with my current job, but with a happy ending. The contract was "standard" but others who also read it thoroughly had the same issue with broad, overreaching clauses that essentially attempt to claim complete IP ownership of everything the employee ever touched. The directors were very reasonable and understood my concerns, we eventually managed to remove or reword all of the offending parts.…

Lawyers are negotiators and their job is to maximize the company profit and security. If one signs such an overraching contract it is their stupidity. It is not fair, but in a negotiation you are not supposed to be fair.

> their job is to maximize the company profit and security

This is a naive view imo. Legal counsel advises leadership and protects them when they eff up or otherwise go to far. Legal doesn’t run the business. I actually heard a particularly coarse, unsympathetic CEO say this in a townhall once. It is true though.

Re: Bumble claims IP rights on employee's open-source libs

#114

Post by CraftingLinks » Sun, Dec 05, 2021, 2:33 PM UTC

Slavery comes in many forms

Re: Bumble claims IP rights on employee's open-source libs

#115

Post by notacoward » Sun, Dec 05, 2021, 2:34 PM UTC

I worked for a company once that had this sort of "we own everything" IP clause. They tried to get me to sign it after I had already started. I crossed out that part, initialed the change, and sent it back unsigned. Ended up going back and forth a few times, and then it got dropped behind a desk or something and we all forgot about it. Not surprisingly, I suppose, that company turned out to be a bit of a mess for other reasons. When I went to leave several months later, I got a note from the CFO's admin.

"We don't seem to have a copy of your employee agreement on file. Could you please sign the attached copy and return it?"

Haha, no. What are they going to do, fire me? I went down and explained the situation to her, and we had a good laugh. Never did sign. All of the company's own IP turned out to be worthless BTW, and they were lucky they didn't get sued for misappropriating IP from the CTO's previous employer (DEC). Companies doing this is a huge red flag not only because of its grasping nature but because it often reveals a general kind of awfulness among its principals and/or backers.

Re: Bumble claims IP rights on employee's open-source libs

#116

Post by _odey » Sun, Dec 05, 2021, 2:34 PM UTC

Arubis wrote: post #74

_odey wrote: post #39

I've asked this before and never got a straight answer, but I'll ask again: what exact clauses do I need to modify in the employment contract, and what exactly must they say, in order to avoid this sort of situation? (relevant to UK employment that is). If you've solved this for yourself, please tell us all how and what it's written in yours so we can do the same. Here is a link to what my previous employment contrac…

You should absolutely continue this pursuit, but keep in mind that the biggest things you can do to avoid a legal dispute are to clearly communicate expectations and not work with assholes. A well-written contract is like a solid deadbolt on your front door: it’ll make reasonable people think twice, but a determined attacker will just smash a window and go through it (or, to explicate the metaphor, sue you anyway kno…

I will, already received a good example here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29449353 (a sibling thread in this post).

Re: Bumble claims IP rights on employee's open-source libs

#117

Post by skywal_l » Sun, Dec 05, 2021, 2:37 PM UTC

ealexhudson wrote: post #92

jiveturkey wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"in the course of" meaning, related to. personal work on personal time is not 'In the course of" employment. It's that latter bit that the GP is obviously asking about. The contract he linked has especially egegrious language. It's not worth negotiating IMO. Any employer that even tries to get such language in is showing their cards.

The plain reading meaning of "in the course of" is not the case law, though, it has established precedent - and most of that favoured the employers in question. I don't know of a case that took into account "personal time" as being relevant, and most salaried employees are not paid on the basis of hours worked. The typical contractual language does go beyond the established case law, but not by as far as you seem to…

I don't know about that. "in the course of employement" is used for various things. For example, if you get injured "in the course of employement", would that include if you fall from your bike on a sunday ride? I don't think so. So I believe it naturally exclude work that you do on your own time, in your house, on your computer.

Re: Bumble claims IP rights on employee's open-source libs

#118

Post by megous » Sun, Dec 05, 2021, 2:37 PM UTC

greatgib wrote: post #25

Here the question is even a little bit more interesting than just the "open source" code you created I think: There is lot of discussion about the ownership of the code, but what about the other things related to the project? Like stars and issues. In no way stars and issues belongs to the company, they belongs to each user that submitted them. They submitted them to the project that was on a specific username. So, I…

Github repo is not the original repository either. It's usually just a mirror of the developer's repository, which is the original one.

Re: Bumble claims IP rights on employee's open-source libs

#119

Post by vladvasiliu » Sun, Dec 05, 2021, 2:39 PM UTC

hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #88

cassianoleal wrote: post #82

Many years ago I had a job offer at Badoo in the UK. After many rounds of going back-and-forth with the contract, me trying to better understand certain clauses, them going back to the lawyers, etc. I told them I'd be happy to sign if they removed the caluses that stated pretty much anything I created on or off hours belonged to them. They went back to the lawyers and came back to me saying that this is not the first…

My experience from the other side of the fence is that this is pretty standard, i.e. nobody would really bother with changing the standard contract for one potential employee unless they were perceived as a crucial asset. The people who do the hiring, the ones who make the decisions and the ones who will work with you later - these are very different groups of people, with some (very temporary) overlap. The hiring on…

> Mind you, if many people have the same attitude as you, the hiring people may actually make the change happen forcing the people in charge to approve a variant of the contract without that clause and offer it to the ones who complain but are otherwise excellent candidates. But this is not a quick and easy process.

I agree with the rest of your post, and I think this is the most important part: if enough people do it, than it's likely that a change will happen. If no one ever bothers to complain, nothing will ever change.

Re: Bumble claims IP rights on employee's open-source libs

#120

Post by lkramer » Sun, Dec 05, 2021, 2:39 PM UTC

In an earlier role (tech support) they had a clause like that, and I pointed it out and said I wasn't happy with that. They asked me to still start the following Monday and promised to get back to me about the contract ASAP. They never did, so I ended up working for them for 2 1/2 years without signing a contract... I guess different companies have different priorities...