Slashdot Mirror
Doing Open-Source Development, Anonymously?
An anonymous reader asks: "I have some free time, and I've recently started looking into some open-source projects that I'd like to start working on. (I'm a great fan of open-source. A package that I wrote four years ago, and which shall remain un-named, is probably running on you Linux system). But I have a problem: I strongly suspect that my after-hours work might be 'frowned upon' by my employer, and although I have no contractual commitment to abstain from such work, and I will not use office-computers or anything, I realize that in these times it might get me into trouble. So I figured I'll use an assumed identity. However, in order to release copyleft software, you have to first claim copyright to it, and this is not likely to legaly hold for an assumed identity. I don't want to release to the public-domain either. So what can I do?"
You don't have to 'claim' the copyright to have it. Just release it anonymously and make sure you have some kind of proof that you are the creator.
Here in Sweden, one would do that by mailing a sealed envelope with the complete work to oneself.
Putting in a copyright notice with a pseudonym might make it easier for people modifying the source to put in appropriate credits.
Why are people so afraid of registering copyright? This is a solved problem.
If you want your copyright claim to be strong enough that it would actually hold up in court, you really want to register it anyway, and using a pseudonym or anonymous authorship is allowed, at least in USAia (and the treaties should cover elsewhere).
You can get someone else (who you trust, obviously) to sign the paperwork as your authorized agent, no need to divulge who you are, and no need to assign.
Most, if not all states have laws preventing the use of such far reaching clauses in employee/employer contracts. In California, for example, they cannot force you to assign to them any invention (anything can be defined as an invention) that was either
a. Conceived before employment with the company
b. Has nothing to do with the company's current inventions and didn't use employer's equipment to produce the invention.
Also, in California, employers are not allowed to prevent you from holding a job with a competitive company.
A solution to the problem with music today
If you're unable to claim copyright because you have to remain anonymous, then you're also in no position to enforce copyright. I wouldn't worry too much about claiming copyright--release it under the gpl and trust public image to keep companies in line. PR value has a lot more enforcement potential than the courts anyway--few OS projects have the resources to prosecute a case in court against a real company, and the outcome is uncertain even if they did.
IANL, but...
If you do your OSS work:
- in your own time
- using your own equipment
- outside the scope of your current employment
it's yours, even if you signed a contract saying that everything you publish while in this company's employ is theirs.You should get this advice directly from a good IP lawyer with experience in this area (I give the google cached version because they're working on their server this weekend). You might find that he also tells you that you need not consult your present employer because the contract they made you sign is in breach of this basic legal principle of IP law. He will probably tell you that you are the equitable owner anything you do in your own time, on your own equipment, and outside the scope of your current position with that employer.
There is, of course, ample precedent for entities, including individuals publishing under pseudonyms, retaining copyright of their work.
Your main order of business (besides getting the half hour of preventative legal advice that you can pry get on a free initial consultation), is to, through your own internal CVS logs for example, continue to document the fact that the OSS work you are doing is in fact being conducted on your own equipment and in your own time.
Another measure you can take is to timestamp, sign and encrypt and periodically mail the CVS logs (heck why not a snapshot of the whole repository) off to a trusted third party, with instructions to store, and not to open the files unless it becomes necessary. This is the digital equivalent of sending yourself a registered letter with your copyrighted documents in it, and then not opening it -- unless you need to do so in front of the judge. Which you probably won't have to, but it's a heck of a good thing to have. If someone informs you they're going to challenge your copyright, your counsel will tell their counsel that you've taken these preventative measures, and poof! the problem will, in all likelihood, magically go away.
I do a lot of programming/video/computer and other technical work, including writing sci-fi. I also do things that are extremely unpopular with techie people -- I work as a a professional psychic/tarot reader (and am rather well respected in the field). Some people in tech fields can be quite nasty in their objections to anything connected with religious or spiritual activities (almost as if anyone who understands logic should never consider the possible existance of anything science hasn't already proven).
I do all my tech work and writing under one name and I do all my psychic work and metaphysical writing under another name. According to the lawyer who instructed me, since I registered the name legally as an assumed name (in my city/place of business), I can use this name legally as if it were mine own. So far I've never had any trouble with it -- including accepting and cashing checks from clients. I do think I did state it as an assumed name on the copyright forms I sent in to the Library of Congress, but I could of just as easily registered the copyright as a work done by my corporation.
If you use a legally assumed name, you would have to register it, but it will be protected by what lawyers call legal obscurity. In other words, your boss has to go down to the town/city hall, and physically look up the record to see your name. For this to happen, he'd have to actually suspect you are doing something he doesn't want, and he'd have to know what name he suspects you are using. In other words, it's not likely he'll realize ever go through the effort to find a legally assumed name.
If you do need to register the copyright with the Library of Congress, and have to register under your real name, how is your employer going to find out who's name is on the copyright form unless he looks it up? Again, you're most likely safe because of practical obscurity.
(As a matter of fact, is the software you're working on something your employer is ever likely to come across and see your name on the copyright info?)
It is perfectly legal to "publish" works under a pseudonymn.
The short of it can be taken from the Library of Congress's site, specifically at the Copyright Office site (alternately found at http://www.copyright.gov). Here is a bit from the FAQ:
If you're really interested, you can get full details in this file (Note, it's a PDF), which specifically deals with copyrights and pseudonymns.
Hopefully this clears up your confusion.
Topher