Clash of the GPL and Other IP Agreements?

Daimaou asks: "A situation I'm involved in at work has raised some questions regarding the GPL vs. IP agreements. When I started working for my employer several years ago I signed an IP agreement that states anything I think while working for them is theirs, as well as anything I've ever thought in the past if it enters their building; dumb, but I needed a job." To make a long story short: Daimaou wrote some code derived from GPLed sources. Now his company wants to take control over what he's written. IP agreements aside, this sounds like a GPL violation since the company's IP can't override IP already established by the original GPLed code. Daimaou also says the company is trying to patent at least some of the code. Is there anything Daimaou, or anyone else for that matter, can do to get the company to cut short their plans and play fair with IP that obviously doesn't belong entirely to them? "About a year and a half ago, I brought in some source code that I had worked on prior to working here; after receiving verbal OKs that the code would remain mine.

My code was derived from code I got from IBM's Developer Works website and also ActiveState's website; all of which was released under the GPL. I made a lot of additions to the software of my own, but the parts from the above sources were integral pieces and without them, my code wouldn't work.

Now, my employer is trying to lay claim to this software and has filed at least one patent on it that I know of. They have also distributed it but refuse to make the source public. They claim that because of my IP agreement, they have full rights to this source code.

I would like to hear what other readers think and perhaps get some suggested courses of action from people who are smarter with regards to law and the GPL than I am."

Comments

That's not how the law works

[hedronist]

This is actually a fairly clear cut situation. If your code is a derivative of GPLed code, then the derivative is under the GPL, regardless of any other agreements. Your company can either distribute the derived code or not. If they distribute it, they *must* obey the GPL.

If it were any other way, contract law would crumble. Imagine a world where some random Contract X (in this case, your IP agreement) can arbitrarily change the terms and conditions of some other random Contract Y (the GPLed code). A logical extension of this absurdity is that I could then write a contract with you that *somehow* changed a contract between two other, unrelated parties. The law doesn't work that way, no matter how much your Work Overlords would wish otherwise.

We Are Not Lawyers

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if we were, we could not give useful advice without full details.

Talk to a lawyer.

This is not a GPL problem

[Mordac the Preventer]

So there's a dispute over ownership of the code you wrote. That's not a GPL problem, that's a contractual problem between you and your employer.

If your employer wins the dispute, they get no more right than you have to break the terms of the GPL.

Re:Righting Wrongs

[CrankyFool]

You can ask the lawyer to write you an opinion all you want, but ... do you like your job?

The question here -- and I haven't seen a clear answer to this from what you wrote -- is: What are you trying to accomplish?

Are you trying to help your company stay out of trouble?

If so, you should write your boss and in-house counsel (if one exists) about this issue and note that you believe based on the GPL, based on your use of GPL software, and based on your understanding of contract law that the company is in violation if it proceeds down this road, and urge them to reconsider. If they choose not to, that's OK -- you can't make anyone do anything smart, you can just give them the information.

Are you trying to stay out of trouble yourself?

Frankly, I think you're not in trouble at all. You haven't broken the GPL. You haven't distributed any GPL-derived code under a different license.

Are you trying to make sure these guys don't break the GPL?

Then submit an anonymous tip, report these guys, try to get them sued, etc.

Your courses of action will differ depending on your desired outcome.

License != Ownership

[ReverendLoki]

As I interpret it, IF the agreement between Daimaou and his employer are valid, then his employer can become the OWNER of all the GPL'ed code that he wrote, but the new employer must also respect the GPL. Just because ownership changed doesn't mean the license did.

I'd address this as two issues - one a matter of pure code ownership, the other as a potential GPL violation. As far as ownership goes, you did sign an agreement, but if you can enforce the verbal agreement you made upon entry into the company, you may be able to retain ownership, though probably not without some hassle. Aside from the ownership issue, though, it sounds like the company is attempting to violate the GPL, and you should really consider reporting it as such.