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

Contracts you should never sign

vadimkravcenko.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 284 posts

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#31

Post by j01 »

oytis wrote: post #26

> Anything you do with the company property, e.g., work computer, automatically belongs to the company, even if you do it on the weekends. That doesn't sound unacceptable to me. It's not that I'm that strict about e.g. reading personal emails etc. on my work computer, but if it's some side hustle, be it for money or for fun, I think it's honest to take your personal machine for that.

I think it's fine to require that you cannot use work equipment for personal projects, but claiming ownership of a project written on the weekend on a company laptop isn't the solution.

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#32

Post by amelius »

oytis wrote: post #29
amelius wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Computers are just office equipment, just like pens. If I gave you a pen and you wrote some story with it, then could I claim the rights to that story? I think not.

That's why they write it in contracts explicitly I guess?

Not everything in contracts is legally binding.

If I write code using some company computer, then the most they could do is charge me for the damages, i.e. the power used or in the worst case I would have to replace the computer.

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#33

Post by VeninVidiaVicii »

7steps2much wrote: post #30
amelius wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Computers are just office equipment, just like pens. If I gave you a pen and you wrote some story with it, then could I claim the rights to that story? I think not.

If you make that pen available to me under these conditions? Sure. If you "just give" me something without any conditions then no, you could definitely not claim that story. But if you make that pen, your property, available to me explicitly only for work and nothing else? It's your property, not mine. I only have whatever rights you grant me to it.

Only if you sign the contract!

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#34

Post by [deleted] »

kibwen wrote: post #19
secondstring wrote: post #16

I mean in principle, I agree with all of these points. But in reality if you stick to these rules hard and fast, you'll basically never accept a job offer. That's clearly an exaggeration, but many-to-most of these clauses are in every boilerplate contract. Whether it's a small startup that's using a generic contract they've gotten from the internet or their lawyers, up to massive corporations, they're all going to in…

> many-to-most of these clauses are in every boilerplate contract Contracts are entirely negotiable. If there's a job you want, but the contract contains an objectionable clause, tell them that you're willing to accept if they strike that clause. If you're at the point in the hiring process where they're showing you the contract, that means that they've sunk resources into you that they don't want to throw away. And…

[deleted]

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#35

Post by oytis »

amelius wrote: post #32
oytis wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why they write it in contracts explicitly I guess?

Not everything in contracts is legally binding. If I write code using some company computer, then the most they could do is charge me for the damages, i.e. the power used or in the worst case I would have to replace the computer.

Yeah, I'm not competent there. My impression is it should be enforceable, at least in the U.S., but I'd contact a lawyer if I wanted to know for sure.

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#36

Post by tpxl »

smeej wrote: post #21

Also verify that anything you're signing when you leave matches what you signed when you were hired. I recently left a company where, when I was hired, I had agreed in "Appendix C" not to recruit any of their employees away from them for a period of 12 months after separation. When I actually separated after more than two years, the "Appendix C" they wanted me to sign and presented as the one I had agreed to at hire…

> because why believe people are malicious when they could just as well be careless?

When your job is to be careful, being careless is nothing but malicious.

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#37

Post by rintakumpu »

amelius wrote: post #28
oytis wrote: post #26

> Anything you do with the company property, e.g., work computer, automatically belongs to the company, even if you do it on the weekends. That doesn't sound unacceptable to me. It's not that I'm that strict about e.g. reading personal emails etc. on my work computer, but if it's some side hustle, be it for money or for fun, I think it's honest to take your personal machine for that.

Computers are just office equipment, just like pens. If I gave you a pen and you wrote some story with it, then could I claim the rights to that story? I think not.

Exactly this, and they are ubiquitous. With software I think it might be a slightly different matter as the company mighy have access to software you couldn't otherwise afford. But it's a red flag anyways ... why would you ever want to work for someone who'd want to claim ownership to something that is clearly not theirs?

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#38

Post by mxuribe »

vabank wrote: post #3

What's wrong with gym contracts?

Also, at least in many areas in the U.S., gyms - or more likely gym chains - are among the fastest to resort to debt/collection agencies....which in the U.S. tend to act very predatory. I don't blame orgs for resorting to collection agencies for legitimate folks who want to get out of paying, but i know far too many people who have been "accidentally" put in the sights of these collection agencies, and have had their credit negatively impacted. It sucks that businesses have such power over citizens and their financial reputation - without as much recourse.

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#39

Post by secondstring »

kibwen wrote: post #19
secondstring wrote: post #16

I mean in principle, I agree with all of these points. But in reality if you stick to these rules hard and fast, you'll basically never accept a job offer. That's clearly an exaggeration, but many-to-most of these clauses are in every boilerplate contract. Whether it's a small startup that's using a generic contract they've gotten from the internet or their lawyers, up to massive corporations, they're all going to in…

> many-to-most of these clauses are in every boilerplate contract Contracts are entirely negotiable. If there's a job you want, but the contract contains an objectionable clause, tell them that you're willing to accept if they strike that clause. If you're at the point in the hiring process where they're showing you the contract, that means that they've sunk resources into you that they don't want to throw away. And…

> because nobody involved in the hiring process consciously chose to put that clause in and they probably don't really give a damn.

Yes but I think I didn't convey my point enough. Nobody involved in the hiring process cares, and if it's a good company they probably agree with you. But this standard contract is what they paid attorneys good money to comb over with a fine tooth comb for liability, and eventually sign off on.

Very very very few companies are going to go pay Expensive Law Co. (TM) $500 per hour to review changes to the contract just because _one_ potential hire who still might not even accept the offer says they won't accept if that's in it. It's way out of most recruiters or engineering managers that you might be interfacing with to make that happen, not to mention making their life way harder. Heck even a startup CTO might balk at having to go spend more on legal.

I have had clauses similar to the "we own everything you do 24/day" one and I've pushed back on all of them. Every time, the response is "yes we totally understand but we have no power to change the wording in this contract we use for every single employee" and it just comes down to a gut judgement call on my part on if I feel they will actually screw me over on that point.

Again to emphasise, I totally agree logically with author's and your points. But it's simply not realistic to approach job hunting that black and white unless you're comfortable being out of work for months until you find the perfectly-flexible-enough company.

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#40

Post by secondstring »

ModernMech wrote: post #23
secondstring wrote: post #16

I mean in principle, I agree with all of these points. But in reality if you stick to these rules hard and fast, you'll basically never accept a job offer. That's clearly an exaggeration, but many-to-most of these clauses are in every boilerplate contract. Whether it's a small startup that's using a generic contract they've gotten from the internet or their lawyers, up to massive corporations, they're all going to in…

> But in reality if you stick to these rules hard and fast, you'll basically never accept a job offer. That's clearly an exaggeration, but many-to-most of these clauses are in every boilerplate contract. In the tech industry, yeah, but there are industries that aren't so employee hostile where you can find better contract terms. I'd have to say in my experience, the tech industry is one of the worst when it comes to…

Totally correct - I tried to caveat that in my post by saying I'm skewed hard tech industry. That was the main attention of the article, and my main experience, so I was writing from that viewpoint.

I somehow doubt that Vail Resorts has a non-compete for their lift operators to go work on another mountain (although now that I think about it VR is pretty terrible so this might have been a bad example)

Post reply on HN