GitHub lets staff own IP developed for personal projects using company resources

Post by foota » Tue, Mar 21, 2017, 8:26 PM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #259

danvasquez29 wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not arguing against there being value, but there are credit rehab companies that would have probably cost you a lot less than the realtor's commission. Many basic credit consulting services are free. I bought a home recently and work in the mortgage industry. My opinion: the buyer's agent should be a flat negotiated fee, maybe an hourly rate. There is very little that most do that the buyer can't do themselves. If th…

> he buyer's agent should be a flat negotiated fee, maybe an hourly rate. A fee sounds good, an hourly rate seems to incentivize the wrong behavior (as does a percentage of the sale price).

Post by amorphid » Tue, Mar 21, 2017, 8:29 PM UTC

strictnein wrote: post #224

shawnee_ wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The result is that contract forms have become a sort of IP-free zone. Exactly. One of the sleaziest tricks used by Realtors (most Realtors are not lawyers) is getting clients to sign their forms: their terms usually have the word "percent" hard-coded into the contract. Rather than opening the door to hourly or fixed dollar amounts, they insist that their forms are the "standard". I heard one recently say in a public…

Every time I buy or sell a home, I'm very thankful that one of my friends has a realtor's license. None of that 7% BS. None of the dumb games they play. How it came about that the services of two realtors was worth $35k on a $500k home is beyond me. Especially in this day and age, where we all just look online and tell our realtors what houses we want to go to. Half the work they used to do is now done by the client.

Post by cmdrfred » Tue, Mar 21, 2017, 8:31 PM UTC

turc1656 wrote: post #317

braythwayt wrote: post #276

Once upon a time, I was looking for a job, in straightened circumstances. I found a so-so match, and since I was in danger of missing a mortgage payment, I decided to accept their offer. Pragmatism and all that. Well, I went in and picked up the documents, and told them I needed to read them before signing and returning them to the company. I looked at the IP clause, and it said the company owned anything and everyth…

"Now that you mention it, I'm not sure I want to employ someone who uses their creative energy for anything except the company's business." Wow. That statement alone tells you everything you need to know about that person and what kind of manager they are. The fact that it was the founder is just...wow. Since it was the founder, if I was in your shoes I would have asked this fool if they took that same approach when…

Post by Fomite » Tue, Mar 21, 2017, 8:32 PM UTC

dnautics wrote: post #301

domador wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Now that you mention it, I'm not sure I want to employ someone who uses their creative energy for anything except the company's business. What a thuggish company, with such a feudal view of its workers! Hopefully most companies understand that they don't own their employees outright.

I wouldn't ascribe malice. Most companies usually do it because the it's the safest way to avoid a legal fight. The more detailed and convoluted the contract becomes the more expensive and time-consuming it becomes to adjudicate. How do you decide whether a 'side-project' is related or unrelated to the work? It's easy to point out obvious cases. (E.g. "I'm a coder and I design a mini golf course for my buddy") but th…

Post by gaius » Tue, Mar 21, 2017, 8:35 PM UTC

0xfeba wrote: post #68

kutkloon7 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In think that in most countries, a large company will always win big trials. Andrew "bunnie" Huang has written a very good 2-page note on this in: http://bunniefoo.com/nostarch/HackingTheXbox_Free.pdf (first two pages, but the whole book is a good read) In the US it seems especially bad, since Americans seem exceptionally obsessed with "living the American dream" aka making a lot of money. Many people assume that if…

> Many people assume that if you have a lot of money, you must be a good person. I used to agree with that, but now politics has cleaved this into two. A) If you're a democrat/progressive (Soros, Hillary, et al.) you're corrupt, greedy, immoral. And you got all that money via ill means. They must be stupid and anti-American be B) If you're a republican (Trump, Murdoch, Ted Stevens, et al.) your earned it from picking…