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

I built Excel for Uber and they ditched it

basta.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 565 posts

Re: I built Excel for Uber and they ditched it

#281

Post by aurareturn »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #225
aurareturn wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“When governments permit counterfeiting or copying of American products, it is stealing our future, and it is no longer free trade.” - US President Donald Trump, commenting on China. Actually, the above quote is not Trump and not on China. It's Ronald Raegan on Japan in 1985. When a new economic threat rises, the US will use the same playbook- demonizing in media, accusations, turn the public against said country, ba…

Except China has required technology transfer and has been actively committing state sponsored industrial espionage for decades. Surely this isn’t news? I’m down with China as a competitor, but we have a strong division between state and industry and China does not. I don’t think a unipolar world is a good idea, and I’m glad for a resurgent China. But it’s absurd to put on blinders and believe forced technology trans…

What you’re doing is completely denouncing BYD’s accomplishments by saying they must have stolen the technology to get to where they are today.

That’s the exact argument you will use to convince yourself of any of China’s successes stories. They can’t possibly innovate because they’re Chinese and not western. Therefore, they must have stolen the tech. This is how Raegan convinced the public in 1980s.

Re: I built Excel for Uber and they ditched it

#282

Post by Dylan16807 »

adastra22 wrote: post #236
geoelectric wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A spreadsheet UI didn’t relate to Box’s core business because Box didn’t sell spreadsheet UIs. Box could have had the author’s hobby project been adopted as a feature but explicitly chose not to. The author clearly owned that bit if they did it on their own resources and own time. In other words, you can write generally useful components and utilities on your own time, network, and equipment; license them to your emp…

Well, you are not a lawyer. OP specifically wrote the code to help Box with its business. That's cut and dry within the scope of an employment contract, under California law. This doesn't get a safe harbor exception.

> OP specifically wrote the code to help Box with its business.

That was the intent, but not what actually happened.

Is intent to donate code enough to put it within your employment contract, when it's done outside work hours and would otherwise be outside the scope of employment?

Re: I built Excel for Uber and they ditched it

#283

Post by acjohnson55 »

sneak wrote: post #246
zik wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My hair stood on end both times he did this. Holy crap that's some massive legal liability.

The code is MIT licensed. Anyone is legally allowed to upload MIT licensed code to GitHub, it's free software and may be freely redistributed.

It's probably not legally his code to license, if his employment agreement is like the vast majority of engineers'.

Re: I built Excel for Uber and they ditched it

#284

Post by Dylan16807 »

adastra22 wrote: post #240
migf wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on your employment agreement or contract. Most contracts I have seen say that any IP you develop related to what you're doing at work is the employers.

It only depends on your employment agreement in the other direction. Work done for hire is by default owned by your employer under federal law. For salaried employees it doesn't matter if it is done during working hours. The employment agreement can give up this right for things not related to the company's core business, and I usually insist on that in my agreements. But that is not the default behavior.

Surely someone has to ask for it before it's work done "for hire".

Re: I built Excel for Uber and they ditched it

#285

Post by aurareturn »

shostack wrote: post #231
fnordpiglet wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except China has required technology transfer and has been actively committing state sponsored industrial espionage for decades. Surely this isn’t news? I’m down with China as a competitor, but we have a strong division between state and industry and China does not. I don’t think a unipolar world is a good idea, and I’m glad for a resurgent China. But it’s absurd to put on blinders and believe forced technology trans…

Don't bother. These whataboutism accounts pop up all the time on stories like this.

And you use the “whataboutism” as your main argument for whenever someone isn’t anti-china. The world runs on reciprocity. Whataboutism is built into assumptions. It’s called fairness and it’s an intrinsic human trait.

Re: I built Excel for Uber and they ditched it

#286

Post by camel_gopher »

mkii wrote: post #177
ipython wrote: post #144

Best quote: "People working for Didi apply for intern jobs at Uber China and then exfiltrate our data. We can’t let them see the formulas or they’ll just copy what we do!” This is so true. People in the US just don't understand the level of economic and industrial espionage that happens in China on a daily basis. I was responding to an unrelated breach at an unnamed tech company back in mid-2000s time frame and had a…

And yet, when the author takes code from one company to use for another, or releases company code on Github, nobody bats an eyelid.

That’s called being a Code Gypsy

Re: I built Excel for Uber and they ditched it

#287

Post by blackoil »

nonethewiser wrote: post #266
ezconnect wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US government have been using all it's tools to destroy US corporation competition since forever. Look at Huawei for just one example.

Huaweis main competition is Ericson and Nokiabin the networking space. Neither American.

Huawei is a giant. In phones they had bigger marketshare than Apple. Their chips are nearly on par with Qualcomm. It is naive to believe they are banned for security concerns.

Re: I built Excel for Uber and they ditched it

#288

Post by aurareturn »

nonethewiser wrote: post #266
ezconnect wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US government have been using all it's tools to destroy US corporation competition since forever. Look at Huawei for just one example.

Huaweis main competition is Ericson and Nokiabin the networking space. Neither American.

Cisco, Apple, Google, Qualcomm

Re: I built Excel for Uber and they ditched it

#289

Post by tomcam »

mkii wrote: post #177
ipython wrote: post #144

Best quote: "People working for Didi apply for intern jobs at Uber China and then exfiltrate our data. We can’t let them see the formulas or they’ll just copy what we do!” This is so true. People in the US just don't understand the level of economic and industrial espionage that happens in China on a daily basis. I was responding to an unrelated breach at an unnamed tech company back in mid-2000s time frame and had a…

And yet, when the author takes code from one company to use for another, or releases company code on Github, nobody bats an eyelid.

That jumped right out at me too. Two levels of IP theft except on the remote chance that both companies allowed OP to open source the code.

Re: I built Excel for Uber and they ditched it

#290

Post by lowbloodsugar »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #282
adastra22 wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you are not a lawyer. OP specifically wrote the code to help Box with its business. That's cut and dry within the scope of an employment contract, under California law. This doesn't get a safe harbor exception.

> OP specifically wrote the code to help Box with its business. That was the intent , but not what actually happened. Is intent to donate code enough to put it within your employment contract, when it's done outside work hours and would otherwise be outside the scope of employment?

You misunderstand. When he wrote the code, which was related to the company's business, the company owned it. Even in California. He couldn't have "intent to donate the code" because he didn't own it in the first place. The fact that he "intended to donate it" demonstrates that it was related to the company's business.

From a practical perspective, even if you think they don't own it, do you have the money to argue that in court if they decide that they do?

IANAL. If you are having issues like this, get legal advice from a lawyer. Not HN.

Post reply on HN