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

Google claims copyright on employee side projects

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 399 posts

Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects

#261

Post by S_A_P »

rs23296008n1 wrote: post #257
S_A_P wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dont repeat yourself. IF you have code that solves a problem, dont rewrite it at every gig...

Now thats a philosophy I both agree and disagree with. Agree: omg do i need to write this form again? Seriously just write a library already! Disagree: this problem is subtly yet incompatibly different to what I've seen and dealt with before. The library would need x,y,z but their IP demands mean I'd lose rights to my closed-source library or be forced to open source it to keep using it elsewhere.

I agree with you. The only absolute is that there are no absolutes. However what the practical application of DRY ends up being for me is that I have a "bag of tricks" I carry with me as well as my own "library o' repetitious programming tasks" that I look into first. Much of the time I can save a lot of time by reusing old code. I may have a bit of code that is too specific for the original purpose and get tired of the technical debt it causes, and re-write it. So in that case I am repeating myself, but its with the benefit of experience. More of a refactor than repeat.

Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects

#262

Post by anticensor »

smichel17 wrote: post #63
mcv wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intellectual Property isn't really a thing in itself. It's a vague collection of a couple of different concepts, including Copyright, Patents and Trademarks. Those are three very different kinds of temporary monopolies granted by the government, but the people who promote the phrase "intellectual property" want them to be considered as not a government-granted monopoly on a certain kind of business, but as a natural…

Perhaps we could try to rebrand IP as "Innovation Protections"?

Good idea but will not pass the parliementarians.

Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects

#263

Post by throw1234651234 »

tytso wrote: post #95

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". 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 is a disgusting policy - basically the company OWNS you if you do anything meaningful. Complete defeats the idea of "freedom" and takes away the already pitiful chances of normal people "making it". Ib4 people pretend not having a job is a valid option. This isn't Google specific, but it's one of the few things that genuinely upsets me. Hell, more than the death of net neutrality.

Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects

#265

Post by danShumway »

Aunche wrote: post #251
danShumway wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The worst thing that happened to the OP is that he pissed off some lawyers, and got into an argument with a guy The worst thing that happened to OP was that he lost control of his project. > I ended up having to hand over maintainership of usbmuxd. ---- > You can just always ignore what lawyers say, and just work on open source projects under a pseudonym while you're employed there I am not a lawyer, but this seems…

> I am not a lawyer, but this seems like very bad advice. That's kind of my point. Millions of people have been employed by companies with similar policies, and undoubtably many of them chose to ignore the "correct" legal moves because it's just easier. If Google really wanted to screw people over, they could, but that doesn't seem to be happening.

> 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.

Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects

#266

Post by ok_coo »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #124
jsjohnst wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google has become just another US corporation They’ve always been that to me. We should all try to look past hype and focus on the reality, not just the perception of the moment. Does Google handle scale better than the vast majority of other companies? Yes. Did Google build an industry leading search engine? Yes. Did Google steal the patented idea[0] that ended up giving them essentially f!?k you money that has en…

I am never sure why people dismiss hype. Hype is a perception and perception, for better or worse, is reality. My boss thinks I am a bum. Do you think it will be easier to change his mind or change jobs? As to why? Google had a good story. People like good stories.

If hype wasn't effective, we wouldn't have marketing.

Let's be honest, good marketing works. For example, there's plenty of cargo culting on HN which is all about hype and following the pack.

We're humans. Hype, marketing and propaganda works.

Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects

#267

Post by driverdan »

tytso wrote: post #95

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". 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…

> It's standard industry practice for companies to claim ownership of everything a software engineer comes up with, even "on their own time".

That doesn't make it acceptable. I've never signed a contract with such clause nor will I.

When I was freelancing one of my clients tried to get me to sign a contract with a clause like this. It would have killed my business since I worked on multiple projects at once. In their case it was an oversight in using a form contract and they changed it.

Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects

#268

Post by naniwaduni »

sidlls wrote: post #156
matz1 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google pay their engineer outrageous salary.

Yes, and we’re all just temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

At Google engineer rates, that would not necessarily be an unreasonable assessment.

Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects

#269

Post by stared »

tytso wrote: post #95

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". 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…

> 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".

If you make a kid (on your own time, with your own equipment, and not in their office), should it also by their property?

Re: Google claims copyright on employee side projects

#270

Post by bitwize »

claudeganon wrote: post #213
franga2000 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> US copyright law is extremely friendly to individual creators at the expense of corporations. You must be joking! Yes, the "Work made for hire" requirements are convoluted, but most of the complexity applies only to independent contractors anyways. I have never heard of a US corporation be in danger because of an employee claiming copyright, yet people's personal projects and own companies constantly get screwed by…

See, for example, the entire history of IP in comics, which Disney is now using to print money.

Yeah, about that, there was an artist named Ken Penders who worked on Archie's Sonic the Hedgehog comics. He sued Archie and Sega over the characters he created for the Sonic stories. Apparently work-for-hire due diligence was not done on Archie and Sega's part, because rather than squash him like a bug they settled out of court saying in effect: "go away, and take your stupid characters with you".

So apparently, companies do have to go through a few hoops to make their claim on their employees' IP airtight.

Post reply on HN