Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Rewarding Employees Who Phone It In

theodp writes "For developers who are all about the Benjamins, Microsoft has come up with an intriguing alternative to Google's vaunted 20% time. To boost the number of Windows Phone 7 apps, Microsoft has relaxed a strict rule and will let employees moonlight and keep the resulting intellectual property and 70% of the revenue, as long as that second job is writing apps for WP7-based devices. The rule change offers an option for employees who don't want to leave for the insecurity of a start-up, but still want a shot at recognition and rewards for their own ideas."

16 of 280 comments (clear)

  1. Wow! by beaviz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft has relaxed a strict rule and will let employees moonlight and keep the resulting intellectual property

    A company letting their employees do what the want in their own free time. They deserve the Nobel peace price!

    Seriously, is it common (in the states) to "own" your employees even when they are not at work?

    1. Re:Wow! by mfh · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Seriously, is it common (in the states) to "own" your employees even when they are not at work?

      You would be surprised, but yes it is very common for companies to claim IP over things created even when an employee is doing them on their own free time. Companies argue that exposure to their policies arguably enabled the person to create the product, service or technology... which is wrong in my opinion but it still happens. I think that if you work for a company and there aren't explicit agreements in place you are protected in most states but you should definitely check first before starting up something awesome.

      This is bad for all of us because it slows down the invention of new things to the angular flow rate of cold molasses.

      --
      The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    2. Re:Wow! by Giometrix · · Score: 4, Informative

      Microsoft has relaxed a strict rule and will let employees moonlight and keep the resulting intellectual property

      A company letting their employees do what the want in their own free time. They deserve the Nobel peace price!

      Seriously, is it common (in the states) to "own" your employees even when they are not at work?

      This is absolutely the norm. Some places are worse than others, making you sign a "everything you do belongs to us" agreement (how enforceable that is I don't know, IANAL). Most places just don't want you to compete with them, so anything you do on your time related to their industry belongs to them. In this case we're talking software, so MS is relaxing that restriction for wp7 apps.

      --
      Download free e-books, lectures, and tutorials at bookgoldmine.com
    3. Re:Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I had to look into this when my previous employer wanted to change the contracts.

      Basically they added a catch all, anything you think or do belongs to us (first borns included). So if you are programmer but come up with a new clothes line peg they own the IP.

      The actual law is actually more sensible, if you come up with something you'd be expected to do in your job the company owns the IP, otherwise you do. For instance as a programmer if I come up with a new piece of software the company could argue it is their IP, but if I make and sell some artwork I own it.

      All been said it is a bit of a grey area and getting it tested in court would be expensive for any normal person.

      Captcha:Stolen :)

    4. Re:Wow! by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A company letting their employees do what the want in their own free time.

      You must have missed the "as long as that second job is writing apps for WP7-based devices" part. That is not "letting people do what they want". In fact, it places a fairly strict boundary.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    5. Re:Wow! by arkenian · · Score: 4, Informative

      Seriously, is it common (in the states) to "own" your employees even when they are not at work?

      You would be surprised, but yes it is very common for companies to claim IP over things created even when an employee is doing them on their own free time. Companies argue that exposure to their policies arguably enabled the person to create the product, service or technology... which is wrong in my opinion but it still happens. I think that if you work for a company and there aren't explicit agreements in place you are protected in most states but you should definitely check first before starting up something awesome.

      This is bad for all of us because it slows down the invention of new things to the angular flow rate of cold molasses.

      To be fair, most employment contracts I've read are a little more specific than that. Specifically they own any IP on anything related to the work you do for them, fairly broadly defined. This tends to mean that, if you work at microsoft, any software you wrote would be covered. But if you wrote a novel, that would not be covered. Actually, the way I read the ones I've signed, they're more on the order of noncompete agreements than the company making any claims as to why you were able to do it. They don't care why, as part of your employment you agree not to compete with their products. The best way to PREVENT you from competing with them is that, if you do, they own it anyway. Likewise I'm forbidden from providing consulting services to competitors etc.

    6. Re:Wow! by billcopc · · Score: 4, Funny

      People sign this shit, because: 99% of people out there are uncreative and just do whatever is needed to get a paycheck.

      Do you honestly think that design-by-committee Java guy next to you has even the slightest spark of inspiration ? He probably can't even get it up without writing 4 support interfaces that describe the various ways one can (choose not to) interact with his cock.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    7. Re:Wow! by magical+liopleurodon · · Score: 5, Informative

      1)They find reading legal documents difficult
      2)They really want a job,and so are will to sacrifice for it,
      3) They aren't all that creative and don't have enough free time at home anyways.

      1) It's pretty obvious that you're signing your soul away. I signed one of these myself, but they're not valid in Minnesota. A number of states don't allow this. California is another one where even if you sign something like this, it cannot be enforced.

      And people actually sign this shit, that is the problem. It works against you because if you don't sign it, they throw you out. If EVERYONE refuses to sign it, the company is the one who is fucked.

      So many companies do this. If you're not in a state where it's unenforceable, the only leverage you have is starting your own company. Which I encourage, and when you all do do that, don't make your employees sign contracts like this.

    8. Re:Wow! by Znork · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The new policies rally the MS troops with deepest access to WP7 source with incentive to develop specifically for the platform.

      Ah, yes, the incentive of taking 30% of the profit the employee makes on his own time. What's next, encouraging employee stock ownership by only requiring 30% repayment to the company of any profits (excepted upper management of course)?

      The humorous part is that management probably thinks employees should be grateful for such incentive, while it will only serve to educate the employees that their contracts shaft them, reducing morale and certainly not creating a desire to work for free in their spare time.

      Microsoft seems more out of touch every year, and this certainly won't help windows mobile. Poor Nokia.

    9. Re:Wow! by VertigoAce · · Score: 5, Informative

      The 30% is the cut that Microsoft takes from every app on the WP7 marketplace (same as Apple does with their app store). Employees get the same 70% that third party developers get.

      The people I work with had the opposite reaction from what you suggest. The policy removed the uncertainty around moonlighting in this case and encouraged people to start developing apps. I don't think this would have been against policy in any case, but most employees aren't going to spend the time talking to their manager, legal, and HR just to get approval to release a $0.99 app.

  2. sounds generous, until by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You rephrase it the other way: "Go ahead and start a business in your free time, as long as you're getting all your work done here including meeting time and face time. Oh, but that business has to be for Windows Phone 7 apps, and we'll take 30 percent."

  3. Re:70% if the revenue? by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Funny

    watching 'the biggest looser' on TV

    Is that the show about people who go around with a wrench and screwdriver and work on loosening nuts and screws, or what? Reality TV at it's finest. Loser.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  4. Not really. by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If Apple announced this, world+dog would deride them for the app restriction, claiming long and loud how 'Lord Jobs' is keeping tight rein over the 'peasants' in his 'domain'.

    If RIM Announced this, world+dog would collectively yawn, save for some folks who would stand back in astonishment that the Blackberry actually had apps*

    If Google announced this, world+dog would think it was normal, and point to that 20% thing they have.

    --

    Personally, I see it as Microsoft casting about to bolster its struggling product in any way that it can. They're having a pretty rough go of it, judging by the numbers so far. To give you an idea, I'm willing to wager that WP7 still has more phones in the channel than in customer hands... and there's very little prospect so far that WP 7 will do much more than eke out a presence this year, if they're lucky.

    * (they do have apps BTW - I have/use a BB Bold).

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  5. Yeah a great alternative by nedlohs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For 20% of your company work time you can work on something still company related but of your choosing rather than dictated by your manager.

    versus.

    You can work on stuff related to the company's product on your own personal time at your own cost and you bear all the risk, but the company will have 30% of the revenue. Oh, and we'll give you a slice of pizza once a week.

  6. 20% time? Not really by adenied · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Someone from Google can correct me if I'm really wrong here, but I've asked a number of Google developers if they really get to use their 20% time. The general answers have been either "Yeah right. Hardly anyone does." to "Sure! I can use 20% of the 60-70 hours a week I regularly am at the campus on whatever I want."

    Not sure if that's really what people think about when they hear about the 20% time philosophy. Seems like it's more of a marketing / recruiting thing.

  7. Straightforward with some gray areas. by Aquitaine · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There are obviously shops out there that try to say that they own everything the employee does. In most places this is not legal and even if it is, you're an idiot to sign them.

    I run a shop that does youth sports management web applications. The only time I care about what my employees doing in their spare time is when it's directly relevant to their job. If you work for me and then you turn around and write your own youth sports application in your spare time, I'm going to sue your pants off because you have access to our code, our libraries, our ideas, and our clients' business needs and you can't pretend that you aren't using any of those things in your new and competing product.

    But if you write a game or a web app that clearly has got nothing to do with your job, such that the only tenuous connection I can establish between your work for us and your free time project is that you became a more competent programmer while working for us, that's awesome for you and good for us because it means you're improving yourself and making an extra buck. If you make so many extra bucks on the side that you quit your job, well that sucks for me, but you earned it.

    There are definitely some gray areas here. Like what if you start working in your spare time on an app that competes with us and then quit your job a month later? Then you get the 'hair salon migration rule' - if you took our stuff (even our abstract stuff) or solicit any of our clients to leave with you, then we go to court. But let's say you quit your job because you think the company sucks or that I'm a jerk and then a year later you start working on a competing product. Forget the law for a moment -- what does your gut tell you is the right answer here? For me, if you've been gone for a year, the only connection between what you're doing now with what you did for us a year ago is that you clearly learned a lot about the business from us, but unless you actually swiped any of our code, 'knowing how the business works' is not a crime. I don't want to police what you do after you stop working for us unless there's a very real concern that you've stolen our mojo.

    The analogy to what MS is doing also seems to be a little bit of a gray area. Our company makes niche software so there's not a huge sphere of relevant work out there. but if your job for MS is WM7 development, that's a bit different. It's tough for you to say that your free time WM7 development has got nothing to do with your professional WM7 development, and MS is basically saying that we'll compromise with you -- rather than having to figure out (probably in court) whether or not your work is yours, theirs, or a conflict of interest, they're just saying 'go do what you want, and if what you want happens to be similar to your day job, we'll sign off on it and let you keep most of the revenue.'

    From a business perspective, that seems pretty reasonable to me.