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

431–440 of 484 posts

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

#431

Post by sowbug »

golergka wrote: post #295
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…

> and anybody that tells you that you can't negotiate to create your own contract for a deal should be prosecuted for coercion As long as you can decide not to sign it, it's a negotiation. Pretty shitty and one-sided negotiation, but still negotiation.

But the resulting agreement might not be enforceable. So in a contract-law sense it's not negotiation. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_form_contract.

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

#432

Post by wildmusings »

sitkack wrote: post #152
Thrillington wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's morally bankrupt, but legally correct.

Why is he obligated to implement a solution? The IP is the idea, not the implementation of it.

I'm not familiar with the case, but others are saying that it was the terms of a settlement, not the court ruling.

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

#433

Post by tropo »

walshemj wrote: post #371
JangoSteve wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

doesn't the USA have the concept of a survey which is done for a fixed fee by a separate surveyor that looks at the property and lists any defects found,

Yes, and it is strange.

First there is an inspection for the potential buyer, paid for by the buyer and thus owned by the potential buyer. This tells you if the house itself has problems like cracks and rot.

Second there is an appraisal to establish the home's value. Strangely, this person might not even enter the home. (they mostly look at sale prices of similar homes) To avoid corruption, the government randomly selects an appraiser. The appraisal is paid for by the potential buyer, then given to both the buyer and the intended loan provider.

Third, there is an actual survey. This measures the land and maps out the positions of buildings and fences and pavement and pools. I think the seller pays for this. I first heard of it as a buyer when I got a copy as I signed the final paperwork, which is pretty terrible actually.

If the sale is cancelled, the inspection and appraisal become worthless. The seller doesn't own them and isn't supposed to have a copy due to copyright. The next potential buyer will probably start with nothing.

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

#434

Post by jnicholasp »

eitally wrote: post #332
dotnetisnotdead wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would have to disagree. Yes, much of what they do as far as finding houses can be done online these days, but there are many edge cases where a (good) realtor can save you. When I first purchased a home my credit history was.. interesting. The value the realtor provided was putting me in touch with the right grants, forms, etc and ways to build and fix my credit. They helped me not get scammed with a high interest…

Not arguing against the value, but why should the seller have to pay for you to receive this service?

The seller does not pay for the buyer to receive their agent's service, except in accounting terms. The commission to the agents is (should be; if you as the seller aren't thinking of it that way, you're misconceiving the situation) priced into the cost of the home. All the money in the deal comes from the buyers.

When realtors' business model gets disrupted, sellers will not end up getting the same prices for their houses as they do currently, or get to keep the 6% that now goes to agents - that money will simply drop out of the cost of buying homes (except for the new, smaller, cost that will be captured by the new business model).

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

#435

Post by jnicholasp »

eitally wrote: post #332
dotnetisnotdead wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would have to disagree. Yes, much of what they do as far as finding houses can be done online these days, but there are many edge cases where a (good) realtor can save you. When I first purchased a home my credit history was.. interesting. The value the realtor provided was putting me in touch with the right grants, forms, etc and ways to build and fix my credit. They helped me not get scammed with a high interest…

Not arguing against the value, but why should the seller have to pay for you to receive this service?

The seller does not pay for the buyer to receive their agent's service, except in accounting terms. The commission to the agents is (should be; if you as the seller aren't thinking of it that way, you're misconceiving the situation) priced into the cost of the home. All the money in the deal comes from the buyers.

When realtors' business model gets disrupted, sellers will not end up getting the same prices for their houses as they do currently, or get to keep the 6% that now goes to agents - that money will simply drop out of the cost of buying homes (except for the new, smaller, cost that will be captured by the new business model).

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

#436

Post by sintaxi »

matthewmcg wrote: post #137

I work at a large law firm that represents a lot of software companies. Our standard employee agreement forms have the usual default (company owns everything you create with its resources or that relates to the scope of your employment). This default has always amused me because lawyers never sign these kinds of agreements with their own law firms . We spend most of our time writing contracts, memos, and other bits o…

> The result is that people treat contract forms as-a sort of IP-free zone

I thought contract forms are automatically exempt from copyright.

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

#438

Post by siculars »

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.

Apple, definitely Apple.

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

#439

Post by munificent »

uniclaude wrote: post #8

People keep complaining about how hard and expensive it is to attract top talent. This kind of measure is exactly how you do it. Provide an environment where employees feel trusted and empowered, pay market rate, screen properly instead of having applicants jump through hoops, and you won't have much trouble hiring. Kudos to github for this, I'm impressed!

One of the main reasons I left EA was because I wasn't working on games I was interested at work, and couldn't work on them in my spare time either. My job in the game industry got in the way of me making games.

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

#440

Post by vacri »

timv wrote: post #417
Zombieball wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My takeaway from the post was it isn't so much that he thinks it's fair but a legal necessity to protect the company. More of a criticism towards how current IP law is structured.

> he thinks it's [...] a legal necessity to protect the company Exactly, which is why his post is totally self-serving propaganda. Though he tries to present the post as "here's a totally objective explanation of how side projects interplay with employment law", ultimately his point comes down to Business owners have all these complicated issues to deal with, so just accept the fact that they're going to screw you ov…

He also mythologises his example: making a video game is a moment of inspiration. No slog, no rewrites, no iteration. Just 'inventions'. I'm guessing that his example company wasn't paying the contractor a full year's salary just to sit around and wait for four 'inventions' to just pop into her mind.

"What are you doing sitting there just cruising the web, Ms Contractor" > "Oh, I'm just waiting for this quarter's invention to pop into my head. Thanks for the payslip!"

Post reply on HN