Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course, IANAL. I also don't like those kinds of employment clauses. The way I understand it those clauses are written to prevent the kind of situation where you have a problem at work, can't solve it, go home, solve it, then offer to license it to your employer the following day for a reasonable charge.
And why is that unreasonable? If I did it on my own time and my own resources they should pay for it. Jobs aren't slave contracts where a company gets to own everything about me. And if an employ doesn't do any work at work and just does this sort of thing: fire them, then hire them as a consultant. The business just lost most of the tax burden of supporting an employee, e.g. pay roll taxes, insurance, etc. And the e…
I think the real problem is if the company was sharing in the profits of the invention, and companies took care of workers as they did back in the day, this would not be nearly the point of contention it is.
My father's company pays you for getting a patent, then pays you a percentage for their profits related to that patent, I dont know how they do the math, and it is likely favorable, but the rub is that there is tangible benefits to you for inventing things, oh wow!