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

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

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 484 posts

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

#361

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#362

Post by flamedoge »

JangoSteve wrote: post #221
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…

> I've been trying for a long time to alter the common perception that Realtors add value; they don't. I've heard this before, but when we bought a house, our realtor added a ton of value. She went out and found houses that we wouldn't have found; sure, most of them came from MLS, but there were a few she found just by driving by or by asking fellow agents. She even triaged a couple for us (by going to look at them w…

how much of that did you take at face value? why give realtors such credit without qualifying data... unqualified "advice" should be looked at...

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

#363

Post by truetraveller »

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…

I'm happy you moved on. I would certainly. Your conversation with the founder was polite. Congrats.

Many of the replies to your comment are rude and go against HN rules, not to mention UNFAIR to the founder and company. It's a free world, if the founder sets a price you believe too high, you can politely turn it down, just like any other high-priced product. You can even state you think it's a bad deal, even terrible. The founder, or anyone selling a high-priced item, does not automatically become "evil". I'm sure the founder is a polite person. Maybe he's afraid of you running away with secrets? Whether he has a reason or not, that's his prerogative.

Please don't resort to this: -"this fool" -"utterly obscene" -"What a thuggish company" -" psycho" -"bullying"

Very upsetting. A comment that mentioned "It's not thuggish" was down-voted.

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

#364

Post by flamedoge »

paulddraper wrote: post #263
adanto6840 wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the seller stands to pay your agent 3% of the sale proceeds, the seller will typically be happy to reduce the price by 3% if you don't have an agent. I just sold a condo in Minneapolis using a flat fee company -- fantastic experience and will never use a realtor again, save for maybe if looking internationally in a very unfamiliar area perhaps.

I just use flat-fee agent in Utah. $95. Same experience. If you want an industry ripe for disruption, consumer real estate is HUGE. Got a couple start ups in my area trying to do that.

area where it concerns overhead due to law seems does seem ripe for disruption. But my concern is that this isn't a technical challenge, but rather political/legal one.

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

#365

Post by amyjess »

BuuQu9hu wrote: post #141
throwaway7558 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree--this is excellent and very tech-talent-friendly. As an example on the other side of the spectrum: I work for a very large Silicon Valley company that is well known (you've heard of them) for secrecy and obsessively guarding its IP. Here we can't[1] work on Open Source, work on potential start-up ideas, moonlight writing software for some extra cash, publish (either academically or releasing software online,…

Your employer, of course, is Google; I know this from my own tussles with Google's OSPO, which exists primarily to ensure that engineers don't have lives outside of Google.

I would've guessed Apple because of the whole "secrecy and obsessively guarding its IP" thing.

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

#366

Post by bussierem »

VLM wrote: post #107
VLM wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Employment is dead, contract is the way of the future. Do you really want to buy into a feudalistic legacy organizational model knowing that the odds of rising up in the pyramid are approximately zero? And they're going to downsize with no loyalty if needed to bump the stock price later on. Like a decapitated chicken the company will strut around a bit randomly canceling or creating projects so you have no control ov…

Most of the arguments against contracting, so far as of this timestamp, seem to boil down to anecdotal "I've got mine so who cares about everyone else" with a side dish of if I can imagine how in a utopia idealized employment could be for everyone, and if that imaginary "could be" employment is superior to how contracting actually is in reality, then its proven with no need to implement it for any individual or entir…

In all fairness, as of the timestamp of my comment, all of the pro-contract-work arguments I've seen include things like "and it's so easy when you have good relationships with long-time clients" and other such things. Which is really the same argument as the anti-contract "I'm in a stable awesome job with great benefits, so of course this is better.".

I have yet to see anyone comparing using the WORST case of EITHER of these scenarios - and I think I would argue that comparing worst cases, contract work fails harder, since the availability of non-contract employment (at least in the tech industry) is certainly easier to find than trying to self-market for high-ish prices as a contract worker with no prior experience to show for it and no current clients, especially since there seem to be SO many pitfalls for new contract workers to fall into that could hopelessly screw them over, at least in the short term.

Edit: To clarify my point: Worst case non-contract: Shitty job, terrible company/management, average to below-average salary, and terrible (if any) benefits and healthcare.

Worst case contract: No clients to speak of, unable to get your business off the ground, still struggling with self marketing, and when you do find work (few and far between), you are underpaid because of a combination of unrealized self-worth and bullying clients who refuse to pay that amount.

In the case of "worst case", at least the non-contract worker is getting PAID.

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

#367

Post by reneherse »

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…

A powerful story, and one I thank you for sharing.

Just minutes ago, I pushed "Send" on a resignation letter from a company that after 6 months of UX dev & design asked me to sign a similarly overly broad IP agreement. I'd been struggling with the decision, toes on the edge of the proverbial diving board for days. Reading your story gave me an extra boost and reminded me I'm making the right choice.

Here's to tipping that first domino...

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

#368

Post by DannyBee »

awinter-py wrote: post #250
DannyBee wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, not really. Most of the cases that get brought are resolved fairly quickly, from what i can see. In particular, the ones actually between employee and employer, employees tend to lose except when it is very clear cut. IE if employer's interpretation of their R&D, etc, is not crazy, they tend to win. So if employee's has idea for juicing oranges, and works for skateboarding company, employee's probably gonna…

You're a dev+lawyer with large company experience -- if you were writing a federal law on employee IP assignment, what would it look like?

This is tough. I'm generally very pro-employee on this one.

However, i've seen both sides of this. There really are crazy people, and plenty of them, who will try to use this to extract money from their employer, etc

Generally, i'd say my view falls somewhere into what a small number of european countries do, and i think that would probably work well here:

Employer still owns IP related to business.

For the situation here (own time, etc), if you generate IP in such a situation (IE not related to business, etc), you must notify employer of that IP.

Your employer has 6 months (or whatever) to buy it from you at fair market value.

If they refuse to do so, it's yours.

If they believe it's related to business, and you don't, well, you can fight it out in court if you want.

The only downside to this system is that for large numbers of innovative employees, it generates huge overhead for the company even just to manage the process.

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

#369

Post by guelo »

yomly wrote: post #354
turc1656 wrote: post #317

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." 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…

It never fails to astound me how such a perverted interpretation of the law can go unregulated. In the past people would coerce you into doing things by surrounding themselves with big strong men. All that's changed is the now they surround themselves with suits and it's supposedly legal.

Hey we can't regulate the job creators, we have to make America great again.

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

#370

Post by jogjayr »

andrewfromx wrote: post #355
jogjayr wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drive to a coffee shop for lunch and work there?

yeah but what if laptop battery was filled with electricity from their office where they pay the electric bill. When I use said laptop in coffee shop, who's resource am I using? Mine cuz I own the laptop or theirs or both?

Charge the laptop at the coffee shop. Or charge it up to full before leaving home for work; you're unlikely to run out working for an hour-long lunch.
Post reply on HN