Share FIles? Get Fired.

The_Other_Kelly writes "The Guardian is running an interesting story, 'File-share defender fired over TV show', where a news organisation, upon discovering that someone who spoke publicly elsewhere to defend p2p file sharing, was one of their employees, promptly fired him. "

Comments

He didn't get fired for sharing files

[slavemowgli]

He didn't get fired for sharing anything. He got fired because he earlier run what seems to have been a BitTorrent tracker in his spare time, was sued over it (in a civil case, not a criminal case), and didn't tell his employer when they interviewed him, so they only found out when he talked about it on a TV show.

He argues that he didn't have to mention it since it doesn't have anything to do with his employer, and I think depending on how the interview went exactly, he's probably right. If they actually asked him about whether there were any civil cases pending against him and he lied and said no, then it's understandable that he got fired (it's not like it's a personal question, after all); but if they didn't, then I really think it's their own fault, and he's right in any case when he says that the whole thing simply doesn't affect his employer in any way.

In any case, it's important to note that he did not himself share any files.

Re:He didn't get fired for sharing files

[sycotic]

In any case, it's important to note that he did not himself share any files.

Suuuuuuuuuuure he didn't, we all believe him...

Interesting legal question

[Sanity]

To what extent can an opinion about intellectual property (or any other law) form grounds for dismissal?

IMHO it is the right, indeed the obligation of anyone living in a democracy to question the laws that govern them. Intellectual property laws are increasingly valid targets for such scepticism.

There would be an uproar in most countries if someone was fired for expressing their opinion on abortion, or religion, why should someone's opinion on intellectual property law be any different?

Re:Interesting legal question

[NexusTw1n]

If the company was an abortion clinic and the opinion expressed by the employee was anti-abortion, then there would be no uproar if they were fired.

He expressed anti copyright and IP views, while working for a firm that relies on copyright and IP. In addition he was only working there for a week, all companies insist on a probabtion period of at least a month to see if your face fits, with instant dismissal if you don't. So he is going to have trouble winning his case.

Yes it isn't nice that your freedom of speech is curtailed by your employer, but there are plenty of precedents for it - from the aforementioned abortion example, through to the Police in the UK at least not being allowed to express racist views even when not on duty.

Re:Interesting legal question

[fuzzybunny]

Sorry, but it's disingenuous to compare racist comments to what this guy was saying. Frankly, unless these comments were made in a work environment, it's none of the employer's business if the gentleman in question is a card carrying member of the national front, american communist party, or whatever other radical group you can think of, unless he commits blatantly illegal acts and is prosecuted for it.

Last I checked, the UK has several anti-hate speech laws, and I imagine that police (and other similarly sensitive) employment is tied to fairly stringent standards of personal behavior. We're talking about a civil suit, not prosecutable views.

Similarly, the idea of comparing anti-abortion statements made by a hypothetical employee of an abortion clinic to this is a huge stretch. Naturally, the man's company "relies" on IP. Most companies do, it is in the nature of many technical companies. He is, however, not questioning the fundamental nature of IP, nor can you compare the issue of IP in any way shape or form to the abortion debate, no matter what side of it you are on.

As far as being allowed to dismiss him for whatever reason, although the UK has fairly lenient employment laws, I do not believe that it has the equivalent of what in the US are called "at-will" states, in which you can fire anyone for any reason (assuming the reason is not discriminatory or otherwise against the law.) In this case, you could, for example, ditch an employee for having a sticker of a political candidate you do not support on his/her car in the company parking lot--IANAL, so feel free to correct me.

Re:Interesting legal question

[Sanity]

If the company was an abortion clinic and the opinion expressed by the employee was anti-abortion, then there would be no uproar if they were fired.

If the employee had not allowed their opinion to affect their work performance, then I see no justification for firing them, and I strongly suspect that the law wouldn't either.

He expressed anti copyright and IP views, while working for a firm that relies on copyright and IP.

Ah, so you can only be fired if your boss happens to disagree with you. Right...

My firm relies on copyright, and I am extremely critical of intellectual property law. I believe that many aspects of intellectual property law hurt my company.

all companies insist on a probabtion period of at least a month to see if your face fits, with instant dismissal if you don't.

Um, wrong, mine doesn't. Either way, having a probation period is not a license to fire someone for whatever reason you like.

through to the Police in the UK at least not being allowed to express racist views even when not on duty.

Ah, because criticising intellectual property law is just like expressing a racist view. Is this were you accuse me of being just like Hitler?

Re:Interesting legal question

[Sanity]

Well no, I never said that, it is just one of thousands of examples the exist. Any sane company will have a clause in their employee contracts that covers bringing the company into disrepute in or out of work.

And such a clause would be unenforceable if used to stifle employee's political opinions.

Good grief. Over react much? Congratulations on invoking Godwin's law. This thread is now over.

You haven't actually read Godwin's law, have you? You probably should before you start accusing people of invoking it.

Re:Interesting legal question

[Dave114]

If the company was an abortion clinic and the opinion expressed by the employee was anti-abortion, then there would be no uproar if they were fired.

If the employee had not allowed their opinion to affect their work performance, then I see no justification for firing them, and I strongly suspect that the law wouldn't either.

Here's a story that erupted up in Canada some time back , regarding the cancellation of a hospital cleaning contract which seemed to result from the fact that one of the company's owners was opposed to abortion. In this case, the location being cleaned was not even that of an abortion clinic. (The story was in the major papers around here, but given that this happened probably at least a year ago now, those papers no longer have copies of their articles online and hence I've pulled something from another source - if you find a better article feel free to post it)

Re:Yo Hemos!

[DrSkwid]

Y, because we lIke you

Jeesh, now "editors" can't even type!

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/04/115 252
In SIlicon Valley: Profits up. Employment Down.
Businesses | Posted by Hemos on 04/07/05 12:45