Slashdot Mirror


Dealing With an Overly-Restrictive Intellectual Property Policy?

An anonymous reader writes "I am very happy with my current job, but there have always been a few ideas for things I've wanted to develop on the side. Ideally I'd keep my day job, reserving mornings, evenings and weekends to see if the side-projects could become viable. The problem is: my employer has an IP policy that states that anything I do while under their employ is theirs, even when I'm off the clock. Does anyone have suggestions about workarounds, magic loopholes, false identity for the side projects? Anything?"

467 comments

  1. Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Disclaimer: Where I work they are cool with "moonlighting", with the stipulation being that you must check with legal. Never been in this situation so this is largely guess work based on stories I've heard from others!

    The obvious is of course to get a new job. I'm sure lots of people are going to recommend that, but of course it is rarely that simple.. especially in this economy and you like where you are working now.

    The less obvious is to negotiate with your employer/your employers legal department. Just be cognisant of the fact that this may inadvertently force you into option 1. If the terms of your employment are there just to cover their ass.. you might be able to work something out if your ideas arn't within their business area. Just keep in mind that you are asking to work on something that you hope will lead to you resigning and pursing full time (I assume) and they may have a problem with that as well.

    I guess the real question is, how sold on your own ideas are you? Willing to risk your job?... because I really don't see a way of persuing this that doesn't end there.

    1. Re:Two mostly similar choices by mrvan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What I did at my current (academic) job is to keep copyright with my employer, but have them license it back to me under GPL. This means that if I move jobs or start my own business I can keep working on these projects. You can sell it to them as showing how they (ie, you) contribute to the community etc, and that they keep all IP so there is no danger of you suing them and they can always relicense.

      Downside is of course that your future business model would have to build around an OSS core, but there are various options (OSS backend with proprietary frontend, web business / software as a service (no distribution = no requirement to give source code), proprietary modules that actually make it work (but make sure that the proprietary part cannot be construed as a derived work), etc etc.

    2. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Sir_Sri · · Score: 5, Informative

      At least in academia most places let you separate your work on the side. If you want to use your work on the side as part of your research work well that's where you get into your situation. When they ask "what are you doing on our time" you have to say something.

      When it comes to the question at hand, one option is to pitch the ideas to your employer. The other is to get a separate job, or ask to renegotiate that portion of your contract or move into a job within the company with a less restrictive contract. Expect that to come with a significant paycut though.

      You actually run the risk, even asking the question, of implying you have an idea for a product on your current companies time, that you may be thinking about (even if not implementing), so if you leave they may claim that work was done on this project on their time, and you're in violation of their agreement, and they have ownership of some of your work. The question posed could be phrased as 'i have this great idea for a product, how do I get out of having to give my employer any money for it'.

    3. Re:Two mostly similar choices by tchuladdiass · · Score: 4, Informative

      This may or may not help with the current situation, but with regards to choice 2, (especially during the hiring process) mention that you do some community work on the side for non-profits, and that the entities you deal with want to make sure there are no legal issues with anything you contribute to them. Sell it as you helping your church with their web site (even if you don't have a church...), or helping with backend systems for running a homeless shelter, etc. That opens the door to them letting you adjust that part of your contract -- after all, which employer would want to be seen as squashing their employee's ability to do charity work / help the community?

      Then, take the contract to your lawyer, tell him what you want to have covered, and he will be able to re-word that section of the contract as an amendment for you to have your employer sign. This may work better at hire time than once you've been at a place for a while though. But worth a try.

    4. Re:Two mostly similar choices by ray-auch · · Score: 4, Funny

      At least in academia most places let you separate your work on the side. If you want to use your work on the side as part of your research work well that's where you get into your situation.

      I wouldn't trust that to be the case everywhere - my recollection is of research grants / studentships coming with "everything you do while you get this grant belongs to...". Plus you had to co-operate in patenting it if they wanted and sign over the patents. etc.

      That was a lot of years ago though - maybe it's all more enlightened, less money focused and less bureaucratic in academia these days...

    5. Re:Two mostly similar choices by LehiNephi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I found myself in exactly the same position about a year ago. Here's the thought process I went through:

      1) If it's a marketable idea, one that could make bucketloads of money, the employer is going to pursue it. They'll even want you to spend work hours on it. Or they'll apply other company resources ($$$) to it.
      2) If it's something you think is super cool, but isn't marketable, the employer isn't going to care about whether you do it on your own free time.
      3) If it's an idea you think is awesome, your employer doesn't agree, and you turn out to be right (it becomes successful), this is the only place where there's a rub. One option (if it's some sort of internet site) is to run it through a proxy (person)--get a friend/neighbor to set up the service but give you all the necessary access to develop/administer it. Another is to fully develop the idea, but hold off on implementing until you're out of the employ of your current employer. A third option is to talk to legal and/or your boss and see if you can carve out an exemption from your contract for work not related to your employer's business.

      For my current employer (who has a policy quite similar to yours), they were very open about the reason for such a policy. Simply put, they're hiring you for your mind, and if you've got a great idea, like it or not you'll be thinking about it during work hours. If you feel your current employer isn't compensating you sufficiently for all of the products of your mind, then you probably need to either A) talk to your employer about it, B) find a new job, or C) reassess how valuable your work really is. No offense is intended, but since you haven't mentioned how well you're paid, or even what industry you're working in, I have to leave it as a possibility.

      --
      Help find a cure for cancer. Join the [H]orde
    6. Re:Two mostly similar choices by MSTCrow5429 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Consulting with the employer's legal department is likely to be unproductive. Their client is the corporation, and they are not under any obligation and are likely prohibited by their State bar's code of professional conduct from telling you what is and is not enforceable in an employment contract. Do not contact the employer's legal department absent your own legal representation and do not attempt to negotiate with the employer's legal department absent your own legal representation. You should also consult with a lawyer on what, if any, retaliation the employer may legally perform in response to any attempts to modify or nullify the employer-employee IP contract.

      --
      Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
    7. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Simply put, they're hiring you for your mind

      No, my employer is hiring me to do work. If they can't tell me ahead of time what work they want done, they have no claim on it.

      and if you've got a great idea, like it or not you'll be thinking about it during work hours.

      I think about a lot of things during work hours. As long as I'm not wasting work time just thinking about stuff, they have no reason to complain and no right to dictate what I can or can't think about.

    8. Re:Two mostly similar choices by patchmaster · · Score: 4, Informative

      In my admittedly limited experience, the subterfuge you recommend is not necessary. Just be honest about the situation. If your side projects are in an area that overlaps with your employer's business, then they have a legitimate right to refuse. If there's no overlap, then there's no legitimate reason for them to not make an accommodation.

      I had a side business doing software for material handling. When a prospective employer showed me their IP/non-compete agreement we had a discussion about the situation. They had the lawyers modify the agreement to accommodate what I was doing. The result was we both understood each other's position and knew ahead of time exactly where the lines were drawn. In the end it turned out there was some conceptual overlap between the two endeavors, but this turned out to be to my employer's benefit as things I'd learned in my side business were directly applicable to my primary job. There was no conflict with customers because we were addressing completely different industries.

      Dishonesty is not a good foundation for any kind of new relationship, but especially not for one with an employer.

    9. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Simply put, they're hiring you for your mind

      No they're not. They're hiring me to work. If they're hiring you for your mind, you'd better be getting paid for a full 168 hour week. Personally, I'm pretty sure my employer doesn't pay me for "thinking time" while I'm sat on the shitter at home.

    10. Re:Two mostly similar choices by graphius · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You actually run the risk, even asking the question, of implying you have an idea for a product on your current companies time...

      This is one of the reasons I don't think corporations should be able to hold copyright or patents. While the company may have helped fund creation of an idea/project, it was a person, or at most a group of people that actually came up with the idea. I do think that the company should be able to stipulate generous licensing terms, or even be exempt from paying royalties (they already pay the inventor a salary after all), but ownership resides in the inventor. This also gives the corporation incentive to treat their employees well, so they will stay and continue to license the ideas to said corp.

      Of course the downside is that things can become a bit more complicated when a group of people invent something, but any lawyer worth their salt should be able to figure out a succession plan. In fact that is all the corporate ownership really is, a complicated, one sided succession plan....

    11. Re:Two mostly similar choices by TheGavster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The feeling among engineers at my current place of employment is very similar (that the job is basically McDonald's but with much better pay and no customer interaction). While it is certainly something that an employer can encourage through policy (having salaried workers still punch an hourly clock, lack of input into future work ...), I think that this attitude represents a lot of what's wrong with the modern intellectual workforce.

      McDonald's pays people by the hour because there is a clear distinction between work and not-work, and they pay you to be in work mode for x hours. Work/life separation is more difficult with engineering work (eg, a short-order cook cannot work from the toilet, but an engineer may have a leap of insight there). I think that an effort is required from both sides to make the most of a worker's mind.

      The first step is likely best taken from the employers' side; at all of the firms I know engineers at, they punch an hourly clock and are charged vacation time when they don't make 40 hours in week. A true salaried worker should be paid a fixed sum per week, staying late when a task is down to the wire, but at the same time leaving early (or for part of the day) when waiting on data or between projects. The hourly mindset leads to people sitting around waiting for an arbitrary time to arrive, or checking out before the job is done.

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
    12. Re:Two mostly similar choices by graphius · · Score: 2

      I think about a lot of things during work hours.

      This....
      If I am thinking of having a beer after work how does that affect my employer.
      Or a more specific example:
      I am at work, say on a Friday afternoon, thinking of going out on the weekend to take some photographs (I enjoy taking landscape photos as a relaxing exercise). If I happen to make a great image that I sell to someone, does my weekday employer have any right to the image?

    13. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Set up an LLC and sign over all of your intellectual property to it. When you leave your current employer, sue them and file an injunction for all work that you have done for them.

      This is not a word I care to use often, but in your case, I'll make an exception: Are you freaking retarded, or what?

    14. Re:Two mostly similar choices by gbjbaanb · · Score: 2

      no, your employer is paying you to work for them. You are their bitch, you should know this as you agreed to it when you signed the contract that exchanged your time for their money. If you had any sense you'd have read it and had the bit that says "all work done during this employment" changed to "all work done during contracted hours" (or similar)

      If you don't like it, you have 2 choices: ask them to alter the contract terms (as both parties signed) or cancel the contract (by quitting).

      You can try to avoid keeping to the agreed terms, but I think you'd be a little bit pissed if they arbitrarily decided to do the same (by, say, paying you less).

    15. Re:Two mostly similar choices by KeithIrwin · · Score: 3, Informative

      For professors, post-docs, and most assistant positions, the standard university contract in the US tends to say that you own the copyright of everything you do and the university owns the patents. This is likely not the case if you're working as an in-house programmer or copywriter or other similar positions, but for academics, they usually own their own copyright.

    16. Re:Two mostly similar choices by AlexPGP · · Score: 1

      It probably would make sense to get legal advice first, before broaching the subject with the employer, if only to get a feel for what the potential outcomes might be. It might be having to find a new job. It might nothing at all if the clause is considered toothless in your jurisdiction.

      I seem to recall a case a few years ago, in Texas (I think I even read about it on Slashdot), where a fellow was sued by a former employer to provide, at his own expense (no less), complete details of an idea he had dreamed up but not shared while an employee (and Texas courts being what they are, the former employer won).

      Cheers...

    17. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Sir_Sri · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm in canada, and different universities have different rules, some of which even apply to undergraduates. My guess is that harvard doesn't own a large chunk of facebook just because it was developed in their dorm, but YMMV.

      I wasn't trying to do an exhaustive breakdown of IP rights in academia. That would be well outside my very narrow experience of universities in ontario (canada) and east of ontario, and I believe at some places you can negotiate this as part of your contract. The only time I was on a hiring committee no one asked, and I was student rep anyway, so if they did it might have been when I wasn't in the room.

    18. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 2

      The policy is illegal, the same as so many of those non-competes that they copy off the web "because everyone uses them, so they must be enforceable". If you're off the clock, you're off the clock.

      And before all the ID-10-Ts start whinging about "non-exempt" - forget it - there is NOTHING an ermployer can do except fire you, and they only time they'll do that is if your idea is really really good and they're trying to get you to fork it over, in which case, aren't you in the drivers seat at that point? They cannot claim your off-the-clock work, since you were neither hired to do it, nor paid to do it. Copyright doesn't work that way, stop being morons already.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    19. Re:Two mostly similar choices by HangingChad · · Score: 2

      The obvious is of course to get a new job.

      That doesn't always work anyway. Depending on how your IP agreement is crafted, some employers try to lay claim to anything you do up to two years in the future.

      The obvious solution is not to sign a restrictive IP agreement in the first place, or negotiate language changes up front that make it clear what you develop on your own time is your property. I did that, more than once, and turned down jobs when they wouldn't budge.

      --
      That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    20. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up. A few more comments to the above.

      1) Timing is everything. Five years ago I was interested in (subject), but, it wasn't a current focus of the company. I presented my idea to management and didn't really go anywhere. Fast-forward to the present, where (subject) is a hot focus of the company, I've got full support to pursue my interest in (subject) further.

      2) Keep in mind the company owns it. And, make sure you _ARE_ working on a side project that does meet business needs/goals. Else management thinks you are wasting time (not good for performance reviews).

      3) Talk to legal before you _ever_ consider going this route. Especially if the idea takes off, you will not want to spend the time/money/resources discussing the particulars after the fact.

    21. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an owner of a small company let me tell you even the secretary signs an agreement just like that and we give them two days and advise them to consult their own legal counsel before accepting the job. That said I am not going to go after someone patenting a nose hair trimmer but anything even slightly related to the company's business or planned business directions would be covered.

    22. Re:Two mostly similar choices by niktemadur · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If your side projects are in an area that overlaps with your employer's business, then they have a legitimate right to refuse.

      You bring up a very valid point. On first impression, overly restrictive intellectual property smacks of intellectual slavery, but then there's always the risk of an employer's ideas, know-how and internal processes being used against them by ambitious yet unimaginative and unscrupulous employees.

      It's a classic scenario, isn't it? The manager of a X business quits and opens a copycat store, sometimes even right across the street, and a working relationship has turned into a rivalry, with the new business having privileged information about how his former employer does what he/she does.
      Then, the new business could sell tacos, sandwiches, salads, pitas, gyros, ANYTHING, but inevitably it's also gotta be burgers, right? WHY does it have to be the exact same fucking thing?

      True story: An office/school supply store was doing pretty good business, until some misguided imbecile tried to duplicate lightning in a bottle and opened another supply store next door. Now there's two businesses sharing the same number of customers in the same block, both struggling to make ends meet now, a toil and chore just to stay afloat.

      Another one: For ages, there were no Spanish cuisine restaurants in my town. One finally opens up, and it's a resounding success. Within a year, there were five Spanish restaurants. Within another year, all had closed down, not enough customers to go around. Meanwhile, during all that time, no Thai or Vietnamese, no Peruvian or Brazilian, no Greek or Turkish, not even a place to get a decent baked potato with toppings. BRILLIANT!!!

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    23. Re:Two mostly similar choices by mysidia · · Score: 2

      Downside is of course that your future business model would have to build around an OSS core

      Then don't use the GPL for this. There are plenty of free software licenses this could be licensed under that would enable you to sublicense.

      For example: You could have them retain copyright, but grant you an irrevokable write to modify, redistribute, sublicense, and produce derivative works.

      Or use the BSD license / Academic Software License / Mozilla Public License.

    24. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I am in my 50s, and when I was in my 20s things were different. Back then it was customary that one's inventions were one's own unless they were created during the work day as part of one's job.

      What has changed is that corporate lawyers have instituted employee agreements that are much more severe - absurdly so.

      One should not be willing to sign an agreement that gives an employer rights to anything you think of during the term of your employment. Your job is not your whole life. Employment is not indentured servitude.

      I myself never sign such an agreement. It often becomes a difficult issue, but I just don't sign, and I have never been fired because of it. One thing I have often done is modify the agreement, crossing out the phrase "in the course of" and replacing it with "pursuant to" where they specify that they own IP that is created "in the course of" my work. These two phrases mean very different things.

      Nowadays, I usually do my work as 1099 for this reason, since expectations with respect to IP are different. Employers think that they "own" anyone who is a W-2.

    25. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Githaron · · Score: 1

      Depending on how your IP agreement is crafted, some employers try to lay claim to anything you do up to two years in the future.

      That doesn't make any sense. If that was the case, everything you created for your next employer during the first two years would actually be owned by your previous employer.

    26. Re:Two mostly similar choices by mysidia · · Score: 1

      You actually run the risk, even asking the question, of implying you have an idea for a product on your current companies time, that you may be thinking about (even if not implementing), so if you leave they may claim that work was done on this project on their time, and you're in violation of their agreement

      Possibly. It's also possible you will move to a different state, or country, to implement your idea, or incorporate the company in a different state. You may not advertise to the former employer the name of the new company, or what exactly you are working on.

      I don't think they will chase ghosts. There's likely little to worry about there, at least unless/until your idea is actually successful, and generates income for you.

    27. Re:Two mostly similar choices by davidbofinger · · Score: 3, Funny

      a short-order cook cannot work from the toilet

      Thank you so much for that image. You have aided my weight-loss program at the expense of my peace of mind.

    28. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends. What did you agree to in your contract?

    29. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another scenario where there's a problem is where you want to develop product X in your spare time that will potentially compete directly with your employers product Y but on a much smaller scale. Employer doesn't want to direct resources into X because he's already invested in Y and will make far more money off it anyway, but he doesn't want your X taking any of those dollars either. I used to see this all the time in the computer game industry where people who worked for games companies also wanted to develop small indie shareware games on the side. Some employers were cool with it, but most weren't.

    30. Re:Two mostly similar choices by epyT-R · · Score: 4, Insightful

      no, he is not not their bitch. he is their employee. there is supposed to be a difference, though in today's world things like individual liberty and life balance are dying out in favor of unhealthy social dynamics. I think the bigger point is that employers should not have the right to expect or have such control.. it blurs the line between employee and slave. agreeing to stuff in a contract under duress (which this is since the choice is work or don't eat) is morally questionable at least, and probably against the law.

    31. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The problem is the employer will simply claim that you had the idea at work and it is up to you to prove otherwise. Your employer will only need to produce one email, one phone call, or one water-cooler conversation to prove their claim, then you're screwed.

      As a producer of IP, the reality is you do not start thinking when you punch on, and stop thinking when you punch off. Even if you apply a process you have learnt in the workplace to the development of your idea after hours (e.g. using some good coding tips you picked up at work, or engaging in independant peer review in a way similar to how it's done at work), then you have actually polluted your product with your company's IP, and your emplaoyer is quite within their rights to claim at least part-ownership of that product.

    32. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My question is this. How in the world does your employer become aware of your side work if you don't make disclosures in the first place?
      Release your work under a corporate identity that shields you from liability, after you've severed your working relationship with your adversarial former employer. It's a hell of a lot harder to successfully sue a corporation than it is to intimidate and harass an employee. But they shouldn't have any reason to take any action since they've never heard of the project, right?

    33. Re:Two mostly similar choices by courcoul · · Score: 1

      And, in the case of the restaurants, sure bet that the 4 latecomers were opened by former cooks, waiters, hosts from the first, who stole the clientele list or the recipe book.

    34. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Xeno+man · · Score: 1

      It's called a non-compete clause. It's there to protect companies from employees that use company resources to research and develop new ideas then quit, form their own company and then produce something with the information taken. You can do anything else that you want during that period but if you start a business that basically does what your former employer did, they can sue you. After that period is done for what ever you signed in your contract, then you can create a company that does exactly what your former employer did if you want.

    35. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Surt · · Score: 1

      The contract probably specifies that you can't work in the same industry (say, computer software) for two years in this case.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    36. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Solandri · · Score: 2

      at all of the firms I know engineers at, they punch an hourly clock and are charged vacation time when they don't make 40 hours in week. A true salaried worker should be paid a fixed sum per week, staying late when a task is down to the wire, but at the same time leaving early (or for part of the day) when waiting on data or between projects.

      If the company has government contracts, they're required to track how many hours each engineer on the project works, even if they're salaried. e.g. When a company wins a DoD contract for $X, they're not given the money as a lump sum. $Y is allocated to labor, and the government cuts the check based on how many worker-hours the company documents. So at least that part of it you can blame on the government bean-counters. Personally I think setting milestones with payments only at those milestones encourages more productivity. But that's not what the government wants, and whatever the government wants it gets.

    37. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their client is the corporation, yes - but it's not in the corporation's interest to lose a good employee for no good reason. It depends heavily on the culture of your company. If it's a cover-your-ass world, then you won't get any help, and may well get a lot of grief, from the legal dept. But not all companies are like that; yours may be a more enlightened one where departments are actually encouraged to be helpful, rather than just forcing you to jump through the right hoops in the right order.

      Warning: it may not be quite obvious to you now, which category of company you're in. Look at your boss: last time someone from another department asked them for a favour - something that required a small amount of extra work for no quantifiable benefit to them - how did they react?

    38. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or he could do artwork that involve goatcx. I would love to see that stupid boss claim it is the company propriety.

    39. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't a problem with the workforce. It's a problem with the hiring and management policies of your current employer.

    40. Re:Two mostly similar choices by evenmoreconfused · · Score: 3

      So does that mean that I, as an employer, am unable to hire / employ someone to invent a something new for me? If not, how would I do so?

      --
      No. Well...maybe. Actually, yes. It really just depends.
    41. Re:Two mostly similar choices by ArsonSmith · · Score: 5, Funny

      you and at most a few others would have to get together and form a legal entity that could then hold that copywright. We could call it a grouporation or a cooperative relationship or something. You'll probably want to make sure you have someone to manage the inventors and some people to help find other talented inventors so you may want to make a people resources department. You'll need to take in some money to get everything started and you'll want some people that can manage it for you so you'll want to hire some money counting people. You'll want to sell your invention so maybe you could have a whole depart^H^H^H^H^Hsection of product price negotiator people. You'll probably want more people to help manage some of these things too. Just as long as it's not a corporation that holds these patents and copywrites.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    42. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also they will claim that if the product is related to theirs that you gained insight you would have not other wise had by working for them.

    43. Re:Two mostly similar choices by ArsonSmith · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What other industries have stipulations like this. If I'm a home modeller and I remodel my own house can my employer claim that my house is now theirs?

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    44. Re:Two mostly similar choices by graphius · · Score: 2

      Realistically, you cannot hire anyone to "invent something new".Sure, you can fund research, or provide an environment encouraging free thought, and with luck something may be invented or discovered. Part of your reward for providing these resources could be a generous (or free) license of the technology. It is still invented by the person you hire.
      To me it seems much more counterintuitive, and unreasonable for a corporation to claim ownership of an idea. Maybe I have worked as a consultant too much, but I still see ideas as the exclusive property of people. Of course it does get complicated to divide up a patent or copyright between a group of co-inventors, but I still think in the long run it would be less convoluted than the mess we have now.

    45. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      John Kerry, whichever way the wind blows.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbdzMLk9wHQ

    46. Re:Two mostly similar choices by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      A lot of employment contracts actually restrict what type of companies you are allowed to work for for a specified duration of time after your current employment ends. This is to prevent trade secret/etc from falling to competitors and IS perfectly legal as long as the restrictions are reasonable (not 10 years and the limitations not overly broad). Some jurisdictions also require that the limitations be for within a certain area (5Km from previous employement, etc).

    47. Re:Two mostly similar choices by sconeu · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not just profs, etc...

      My daughter works in the dining hall at UCSB, and she got a "Patent Amendment" that she had to sign.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    48. Re:Two mostly similar choices by jrumney · · Score: 1

      The problem of the second option is that you just informed your employer of the existence of this idea that you had while working for them, so they may end up claiming legal ownership even after you resort to option 1 when option 2 fails.

    49. Re:Two mostly similar choices by iocat · · Score: 1

      This. Honest is the best policy. At my last job, I had a similar agreement, and I wanted to do something that was theoretically (but not practically) directly in my field -- I wanted to make an indie videogame, while working at a videogame company (that made macro games). I talked to my boss, explained the situation, came to a verbal agreement, sent him an email, and got an email response giving me the go-ahead to do the project (with a former co-worker who had gone to a competitor, no less). It didn't go anywhere, but if it had been the next Limbo, I was protected. If I had been sneaky and made the next Limbo, I'd be in copyright/IP/legal purgatory. Also, most jobs with this type of agreement will have an invention assignment form when you start the job, where you can specifically carve out previous inventions/IPs you've developed or are developing. I advise everyone in a creative endeavor to pay close attention to this and avail themselves of the ability to carve things out before they start a new job.

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    50. Re:Two mostly similar choices by gd2shoe · · Score: 2

      ... Even if you apply a process you have learnt in the workplace to the development of your idea after hours (e.g. using some good coding tips you picked up at work, or engaging in independant peer review in a way similar to how it's done at work), then you have actually polluted your product with your company's IP, and your emplaoyer is quite within their rights to claim at least part-ownership of that product.

      Not one bit. That doesn't mean that you won't have to fight it in court, but employees are expected to learn and grow on the job. Former employees are expected to have learned. New hires are expected to have learned from former employers.

      If you use a specific patent, copyright or other documented intellectual property or contractual trade secret, then you're in trouble. If they can't make a legal claim on something against an arbitrary rival, then they can't make the claim against a former employee.

      --
      I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
    51. Re:Two mostly similar choices by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      1) If it's a marketable idea, one that could make bucketloads of money, the employer is going to pursue it.

      They may not. (IE, I think your third point is a lot more common than the 1st.) I had a friend who kept trying to get his project made and kept getting shutting down. So he left, and now he on the cusp of making boatloads of money. Companies are risk adverse, and of great ideas are pooh poohed until you're the one that proves that it's commercially viable.

      I'd always recommend what I do, at least within the field of programming - if they don't plan on financially backing you on projects you do outside of work time, than they concede the the ownership of those ideas/work. Most employers that I've run into say as much in their contracts, and if they don't, every single last one of them has amended the contract to say as much. What I do at work is theirs - what they don't let me work on at work is not. They have not hired my mind, they have hired by ability to do the work they expect me to do during work hours (and compensated overtime) at the salary we agreed upon in the contract.

      I'd be wary of any position in which shit I do outside of work could contractually end up in their hands, but thus far, after 12 years of this, nobody has batted an eye when I've requested such a reasonable change before I sign an employment contract. (From their perspective, it's obvious why they'd try and start with blanket ownership, and also obvious why not being able to bend on such matters would make recruiting prohibitively difficult.)

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    52. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should have had them license it to you LGPL. Just saying. It is immoral to demand someone donate their work without rights to their creation just because they had the audacity to use your software. Considering you are not the owner of your own work, and you might one day want to use your life's work in a non-academic way, do you really want the university to own your derivative works, even when the derivation isn't a derivation at all? It is rare to be discharged by a University, but if you were, do you want your future research efforts (based on your past research efforts) to truly be based on a clean slate?

    53. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      This explains why firearms are so popular in Texas.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    54. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      even if a short order cook prepared my meal while sitting on the toilet I'd have to pass...

    55. Re:Two mostly similar choices by mrvan · · Score: 1

      That depends on your specific situation. In my case, I had two fears: #1 that my employer would prevent me from working on 'my' software if I leave, and #2 that a competitor would 'run away' with my software without sharing back.

      If your only fear is #1, then surely you want the most permissive license, i.e. BSD or equivalent. In my case, both fears lead me to use the (Affero) GPL.

      Using a copyleft license might actually help get permission from legal since you will have to* share any improvements you make back with the company. If I were the employer, I would sooner license as GPL than as BSD, since BSD essentially turns it into shared copyright, while in GPL the copyright owner has a substantially better legal position than the licensee.

      You could even present it as a proper 'two-way' contract: you give all IP on the specific project to them (preventing any future difficulty over the legality of the employment conditions and fighting over whether all work was actually done during your tenure) and in return they license it to you. Reducing risk and uncertainty for the employer might be language that the legal people understand.

      *) obviously, you only have to share back when you distribute or (under the Affero clause) when you offer it as a service on the internet

    56. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Kjella · · Score: 2

      And before all the ID-10-Ts start whinging about "non-exempt" - forget it - there is NOTHING an ermployer can do except fire you,

      And sue you and get injunctions to prevent you making money from it. So now you're out of work, paying lawyer fees burning through the nest egg you were supposed to start a business with.

      They cannot claim your off-the-clock work, since you were neither hired to do it, nor paid to do it.

      They will find some bullshit way to say your work is tainted by some IP you've used or seen at your job, and you will be forced to defend against that. The cost of proving that you work is clean and only using general methods and skills is enough that even if you win, you lose.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    57. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Monkey see, monkey do. Stupid monkey.

    58. Re:Two mostly similar choices by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      not really - chances are the contract just had 'boilerplate' terms in it that were written buy some lawyer years ago to cover all cases for the company. No-one usually does similar work outside of the office anyway so it's all good. Until you get to these cases (like software dev) and you realise the contract is not good enough.

      I had this in my terms, I read it first (shock!) and asked them to alter it. They did, they were very happy to as they didn't understand why those restrictions were there in the first place. I think that boilerplate replaced the contract terms for all future employees at my place. Really, its not a big deal, the company isn't out to screw you (well, some are I guess) so modification (or just written agreement for external projects) is something you're going to get the green light for if you only ask like an adult.

      (which isn't something a whiny poster to /. complaining that he can't have everything his own way would ever find out)

    59. Re:Two mostly similar choices by daem0n1x · · Score: 1

      Finally, somebody writes something sane. Servitude was banned long ago. What you do in your own time is your own business.

      What will they demand next? That you deliver your children that have been conceived while working for the company?

    60. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      To me it seems much more counterintuitive, and unreasonable for a corporation to claim ownership of an idea.

      Neither copyrights nor patents constitute "ownership of an idea", so your whole argument is built on sand.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    61. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 1

      complete details of an idea he had dreamed up but not shared while an employee (and Texas courts being what they are, the former employer won).

      It is an interesting quirk: Republicans like to crowe about how racist Democrats were (you know, in the 1860s) but in real life, they have no problem with this form of intellectual slavery. I.e. "We paid you for work product that you provided, but by virtue of you being my employee, I own everything you produce."

      By that retarded logic an employee could seemingly be required to do anything by her employer. Where is the line? My ultra-conservative friends say there isn't one: Your employer should have the right to impose any terms they choose on employment, and if you agree, you should have no recourse in court, EEOC, or the media (NDA.)

      --
      Who did what now?
    62. Re:Two mostly similar choices by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Then, take the contract to your lawyer, tell him what you want to have covered, and he will be able to re-word that section of the contract as an amendment for you to have your employer sign.

      You don't have to do any of that. All you have to do is read through the contract, cross out or reword the relevant portions, then sign it and return it. Most time they won't even notice or care. If they do though, and you are the right man for the job, no sane company is going to refuse to hire you because you disagree with their boilerplate contract. If you are assertive, they will accommodate you. You are not asking for anything unreasonable.

    63. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 1

      What will they demand next? That you deliver your children that have been conceived while working for the company?

      Good question! Maybe this was what Newt was referring to on the campaign trail when he proposed to put 9-10 year olds to work scrubbing bathrooms in public schools as a budget-savings measure, and "workforce development" plan.

      --
      Who did what now?
    64. Re:Two mostly similar choices by shiftless · · Score: 1

      On first impression, overly restrictive intellectual property smacks of intellectual slavery, but then there's always the risk of an employer's ideas, know-how and internal processes being used against them by ambitious yet unimaginative and unscrupulous employees.

      Yes, and there's only one thing you can do to prevent this: treat your employees with dignity and respect. Contracts are next to useless when a person is bound and determined to screw your company over.

      WHY does it have to be the exact same fucking thing?

      Because if the copycat had any creativity/intelligence to call his own, he wouldn't need to copy other people's ideas verbatim.

      No business which is led by competent, secure, creative, and intelligent people fears a copycat. It's the people who actually have imagination and vision that you don't want leaving the company and taking all its secrets with them. Copycats are nothing more than leeches on society and being copied by them is harmless, because by definition they will always be one step behind you.

      Again, the solution to this problem is simple: pay and treat your employees well, and know what the fuck you are doing (i.e. fully understand your industry). Then you will be successful in discouraging competent employees from jumping ship to go do their own thing, without having to try threats and intimidation. That tactic only works on the type of people you don't want filling your organization.

    65. Re:Two mostly similar choices by shiftless · · Score: 2

      And, in the case of the restaurants, sure bet that the 4 latecomers were opened by former cooks, waiters, hosts from the first, who stole the clientele list or the recipe book.

      And the first restaurant--if they are indeed competent to remain in business--doesn't give a flying damn about someone stealing its restaurant book or clientele list, because these represent only a fraction of that business's value. The value of restaurants comes not from its food (which is a commodity), but because of the atmosphere and service.

    66. Re:Two mostly similar choices by 6Yankee · · Score: 3, Funny

      a short-order cook cannot work from the toilet

      ...but when I was in McJail, I had a shift manager who would disappear into the toilets whenever a bus showed up. Even grabbed a quarter-pounder to eat while he was sitting there, with his trousers round his ankles, listening to the rest of us running around like headless chickens.

      He was most unimpressed when we discovered that we could get to the cistern from the cleaning cupboard and flush the bog under him :D

    67. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The policy may be illegal, depending on the state you live/work in and the employment laws there, the same as so many of those non-competes that they copy off the web and have been enforced in courts in various states across the nation. Depending on your state YMMV.

      And before all the ID-10-Ts start whinging about "non-exempt" - remember - again depending on the state you live in, your employer may be able to sue you and take your work claiming work for hire based on the contract YOU SIGNED. Signed contracts are very hard to get out of unless you can show they are somehow legally unenforceable, such as being signed under duress or being or having clauses that are against either state or federal law. Merely being a requirement for employment is not usually considered "duress" in regions where such clauses are enforceable as you do have the option to not take the job.

      There, fixed it for you.

    68. Re:Two mostly similar choices by rhombic · · Score: 1

      So is the person I hire also going to spend the $50,000 to $150,000 to file, prosecute, and maintain a multinational patent family protecting those ideas? Otherwise, why would I be interested in a "generous (or free) license? I'd just use the technology for free, like everybody else would. For that matter, why would I hire the person to invent anything? I would just use the technology that others are paying to develop. Oh wait...

      --
      1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual.
    69. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >which employer would want to be seen as squashing their employee's ability to do charity work / help the community?

      IBM, at least in the old days.

    70. Re:Two mostly similar choices by hexagonc · · Score: 2

      This is absolutely the case and doesn't get enough attention in these days of "IP" run amok. People talk about a company's "IP" as if it encompasses anything that is produced from the mind; it is not. In the US, there are only three types of "IP" that are protected by Federal law: copyrights, trademarks and patents. From a software perspective, you can think of these as sourcecode, logos (that have to be registered with the government), and technical design documents.

      On the state level, things get a little more nebulous with the concept of a "trade secret". Now, trade secrets are much more broad than the federally enforced IP. A trade secret really can be almost any technique or process that is developed or learned by an employee on the company's dime. However, there are limits to what a company can claim as a trade secret since it is in the public interest for employees to be able to learn on the job and apply that experience to future jobs. IANAL, but I had to do research on this because I was in a similar predicament to the submitter. In general, a company can only claim a "trade secret" for information that is not generally known and from which it can derive some business benefit. It also has to be actively taking steps to protect the dissemination of such knowledge, e.g., nondisclosure agreements, access controls, etc. Again, this varies to some extent by state so one really might need to talk to a lawyer with respect to trade secrets. As a point of reference, there are important differences between the trade secret laws in California and Massachusetts.

    71. Re:Two mostly similar choices by graphius · · Score: 1

      I would just use the technology that others are paying to develop

      except you would not have license to do so, and could be sued, same as now...

    72. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, when I recently signed my academic contract (University of Florida, FWIW), the university laid claim to all intellectual property produced related to the area for which I was hired. I told them this was ludicrous - why should they get that for what is basically just accounting services on some other entity's grant money? - initially, but they said it was standard and after a bit of research, I found that it is pretty common (as in, >75% of the dozen or so I asked outside of Florida, and of course all of them in Florida) for public universities in the US to make such grabs; no private U's would share any contract info when I asked them about it.

      Let that be a warning to graduate students thinking about going into research: you are signing up to have nothing other than your paycheck (basically median wage starting out) and more flexible hours. So make sure you're doing it for the work, not the money, and that you can swallow your principles about leeches living off your effort.

    73. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Courageous · · Score: 1

      Sure about that? A local pho restaraunt was sold to new owners. After the sale, the food quality dropped. I noticed it, all my friends noticed it. I don't go there any more. I did find where the old owners opened their new place, though, and go there. And that's with what amounts to beef noodle stew.

      While technically the old owners sold their recipes, I suspect that they weren't the real recipes. If that's not true, the new owner's cut back on ingredients or something.

      That place gets a lot less busy these days.

      And you're quite wrong about recipes not being coveted assets.

    74. Re:Two mostly similar choices by j-pimp · · Score: 1

      It is an interesting quirk: Republicans like to crowe about how racist Democrats were (you know, in the 1860s) but in real life, they have no problem with this form of intellectual slavery. I.e. "We paid you for work product that you provided, but by virtue of you being my employee, I own everything you produce."

      Your mixing up racism and slavery. Yes American slavery was clearly racist, but not all racism is slavery. Also, this IP slavery is not racist. My current CEO is American Indian and most of the developers are American Indian, and they have to sign a typical draconian IP assignment document. Every previous employer I've had that made me sign a typical draconian IP assignment document, and it was always white executives opressing mostly white employees. I'd be hard pressed to describe what you call IP slavery as a racists institution in its current incarnation.

      Finally, with regard to this being a Republican issue, the overwhelmingly Democrat members of the RIAA practice similarly IP enslavement.

      By that retarded logic an employee could seemingly be required to do anything by her employer. Where is the line? My ultra-conservative friends say there isn't one: Your employer should have the right to impose any terms they choose on employment, and if you agree, you should have no recourse in court, EEOC, or the media (NDA.)

      Now let me argue that point.

      When you terminate your employment, you terminate IP assignment. I'm all for a law allowing that. With regard to NDA, if something is truly that bad and institutionalized, someone with nothing to lose will break their NDA, get sued and declare bankruptcy. The checks and balance there is for employers to keep us happy and fed enough for us not te become that desperate. The only sustainable way to do that is for the IP assignment documents to not be draconian

      --
      --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
    75. Re:Two mostly similar choices by rhombic · · Score: 1

      If the person hasn't filed and been granted a patent, I'm not infringing anything, and there'd be no basis dor damages if I used that technology. Indeed, same as it is now. Infringement damages are tied to the issued patent claims that the infringing party violated. No issued claim, no damages. My point is, filing and prosecuting a patent is expensive. Most individuals lack the resources to do so. If you don't file and aren't granted a patent, you've got nothing to license.

      Obviously for copyright the rules are different, but most technologies can be re-implemented.

      --
      1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual.
    76. Re:Two mostly similar choices by v1 · · Score: 2

      no, your employer is paying you to work for them. You are their bitch, you should know this as you agreed to it when you signed the contract that exchanged your time for their money. If you had any sense you'd have read it and had the bit that says "all work done during this employment" changed to "all work done during contracted hours" (or similar)

      In most cases people are hired to perform specific tasks. They are not expected to perform tasks far outside the bounds of those things. If you're hired to be a programmer for an auto company, they expect you to write code for their cars or their business. If you come up with a good idea on how to manage antilock brakes, whether or not while on the clock, that idea is theirs. If you come up with an optimization on a mailserver while you're off the clock while you're at home, they might have claim to that, if part of your job involves maintenance of the servers while at work. If you think of a really good new recipe for your favorite lasagna one weekend, come on now... do you really expect that to be company property? (but see, if you blew an hour of their time during your day job thinking about it, instead of while off the clock, you've cheated them out of some of the time they pay you for)

      You can't just simply say "anything you think of, on or off the clock, is mine". It will need to have some relevance to the job you were hired to do to hold water.

      When you are hired by a company, they do not own your life. They own your services and the fruits of your services created during a fixed period of time during the week. They may also have claim to IP created off the clock that is directly related to the work you perform while on the clock, because you are benefitting from the time they paid you for while at work, where they were paying you to think about those things.

      Simply because you "might have been thinking about that while you were at work yesterday" doesn't mean they own the idea. If you're being productive and focused at work you won't likely have much time to think about anything off task anyway. If you do waste company time thinking about unrelated things you are working on independently at home, (like spending an hour on the web researching different new spice ideas for your lasagna you're going to be making for dinner on Sunday) then you either have to look at it as the employer having a stake in your "project" at home, OR that you are cheating the company by misuse of on-the-clock time. Since the former is such a grey area and difficult to quantify, the latter is the one that should be enforced. In other words, if you're frequently daydreaming at work on design ideas for your new automatic porch painter while at work, they ought to replace you with someone with more focus that will have better productivity, instead of trying to claim some stake in your painting business you do on the weekend.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    77. Re:Two mostly similar choices by scsirob · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You actually run the risk, even asking the question, of implying you have an idea for a product on your current companies time, that you may be thinking about (even if not implementing), so if you leave they may claim that work was done on this project on their time, and you're in violation of their agreement, and they have ownership of some of your work. The question posed could be phrased as 'i have this great idea for a product, how do I get out of having to give my employer any money for it'.

      You can get around this by posing the question differently. Simply suggest that you do not have that idea, instead one of your friends does. And your friend has asked if you could help out on the side. You are now doing the prudent thing by asking your employers legal department if they have anything against that.

      --
      To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
    78. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      copywright? copywrites?

      Seriously?

    79. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Gramie2 · · Score: 1

      In my city, a guy opened a Thai/Cambodian restaurant. After a few years, he sold it and opened another. This happened four times, and each of the restaurants (all except the last within a four-block radius) seem to be doing fine. Many of the customers followed Pat from restaurant to restaurant, but they all serve quite decent food, with extremely similar menus.

    80. Re:Two mostly similar choices by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 1

      You have opinions, which is nice. The original poster has a contract, signed and legal, which can be used to take whatever the employer desires from the employee. As idealist as you would like to be, unless OP gets out of this somehow, your opinions are irrelevant.

      Given the contract in question, they are indeed being hired for their thinking ability. Places where you don't have to think, like entry level and manual labor, don't care what you think about.

      Higher paying jobs usually require that you make decisions and do buzzwordy things like "drive innovation". When you have an idea about something new that could make money, that's innovation and your greedy employer wants a piece of it, or at least the right of first refusal.

      That's the real world, and that's what we're talking about. Being self-employed, or in entry level or manual labor, or philosophizing, are all not on topic. If you have a thinking type job where your employer does *not* own your mind, great, you don't have the same problem as OP.

    81. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1

      No, they can't. Companies aren't going to waste money on a "what-if" that they're going to lose anyway, and have to pay damages. Get into the real world for a change, mkay?

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    82. Re:Two mostly similar choices by julesh · · Score: 1

      You have opinions, which is nice. The original poster has a contract, signed and legal, which can be used to take whatever the employer desires from the employee.

      Not necessarily. Depending on jurisdiction, there are variety of laws that limit what employers can include in employment contracts. If the term is covered by one of those laws, it's invalid, and OP is free to ignore it. For this reason, he needs to talk to a local employment law specialist.

    83. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1
      Try again - any contract that goes against public order is invalid. It doesn't even have to go against a particular statute, just general principles of equity and fairness. For example, one of my former employers had a 5-year term on their non-competes. Sure I signed it, knowing that jurisprudence had already held that 5-year non-competes were against public policy here and as such the whole non-compete clause was invalid. And I told them as much after. So what?

      So most of those non-competes out there? Garbage, so stop with the whining already. You can safely sign a contract that has invalid provisions, and then ignore the invalid provisions. If the contract said "I give my first-born as part of the deal", you can sign it and ignore it.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    84. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my last job, this situation was fixed with a small talk. The clause was present to cover their ass, and they did not care as long as it was not in the same technical field. In fact they sort of encourage it as it often demonstrate passion, a good trait for a technical employee. Several employees where actually doing it I learned.

      BUT at another job, they wanted to be informed for a single reason: if your not at work you are suppose to take care of your personal life and rest. If you are working on the side for another 40 hours, you can hardly be at your prime strength, and if a rush is suddenly needed they cannot count on you. As a programmer I am very well paid, and at that price they can expect me to give them my first priority.

       

    85. Re:Two mostly similar choices by j-pimp · · Score: 1

      The contract probably specifies that you can't work in the same industry (say, computer software) for two years in this case.

      Two years is a bit draconian. Now if it was more specific, e.g. you can't work for a search engine company, that would be ok.

      --
      --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
    86. Re:Two mostly similar choices by j-pimp · · Score: 1

      A lot of employment contracts actually restrict what type of companies you are allowed to work for for a specified duration of time after your current employment ends. This is to prevent trade secret/etc from falling to competitors and IS perfectly legal as long as the restrictions are reasonable (not 10 years and the limitations not overly broad). Some jurisdictions also require that the limitations be for within a certain area (5Km from previous employement, etc).

      Employers are usually pretty lenient about those clauses, because in the end its mutually assured destruction, and if they go after non-egregious cases, they will lose. In the end, their nuclear weapons, the threat of them is better than the actual use.

      --
      --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
    87. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Edgester · · Score: 1

      You overlooked a third option: The company sees that you aren't over-worked enough and want to work more, so they just make you work more hours per week.

    88. Re:Two mostly similar choices by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      You actually run the risk, even asking the question, of implying you have an idea for a product on your current companies time, that you may be thinking about (even if not implementing), so if you leave they may claim that work was done on this project on their time, and you're in violation of their agreement, and they have ownership of some of your work.

      I'd like to say I have enough faith in the justice system that, if they were to make such a laughably false claim, especially without any evidence to back it up, that they would be laughed out of any courtroom or legal office. Sadly, there are just far, far, far too many assholes in the world today for me to have that kind of faith.

    89. Re:Two mostly similar choices by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      It's called "Work for Hire". Stipulate into the employment contract that they are being hired specifically to work on this, and that any patents/copyrights that come out of the work are the employees, but you are granted a permanent, non-exclusive, worldwide, non-revocable royalty-free license to use them as you see fit.

    90. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in canada...YMMV.

      Your meterage may vary?

    91. Re:Two mostly similar choices by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      They constitute "Exclusive rights to an idea for a lengthy period of time", so it's close enough.

    92. Re:Two mostly similar choices by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Dishonesty is not a good foundation for any kind of new relationship, but especially not for one with an employer.

      While I definitely agree here, it's really something that the employee has to judge for themselves. There are a lot of very petty managers out there who would see anything like what you said to be a threat to their power. They may also see the "designing a website for your church" thing as one too, but less likely.

      If you do work at a good place, then yes, it is far, far better being honest with your employer. If they've been up front with you regarding other things, you kinda owe it to them to be up front with them.

    93. Re:Two mostly similar choices by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      I think he was talking in a different meaning than you were. The recipe isn't really what's important, it's how the food itself is prepared. Just because someone has the recipe doesn't mean they're going to actually use high quality ingredients, or that they aren't just going to cut corners completely.

    94. Re:Two mostly similar choices by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      They've had multiple lawyers work on creating that contract. It can't hurt to have one in your corner working for you.

    95. Re:Two mostly similar choices by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      I don't give a shit if they are "boilerplate" or not. It's still entirely unreasonable for them to have such overreaching clauses in a contract.

    96. Re:Two mostly similar choices by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      The problem is the employer will simply claim that you had the idea at work and it is up to you to prove otherwise

      Wouldn't they have to have... you know, evidence to back that claim up?

    97. Re:Two mostly similar choices by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      The policy is illegal, the same as so many of those non-competes that they copy off the web "because everyone uses them, so they must be enforceable"

      I believe that depends on the state you're in. And some claim that being salaried means that you're technically always on the clock. I happen to think it's absolute bullshit, but I also would not be willing to go to court to fight it.

    98. Re:Two mostly similar choices by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Depends on what it is, how close to the core business your idea is, and how big of a dick your employer is.

    99. Re:Two mostly similar choices by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Merely being a requirement for employment is not usually considered "duress" in regions where such clauses are enforceable as you do have the option to not take the job.

      I cannot agree with this statement at all, considering that having a job is generally considered a requirement for being able to pay rent, buy food, etc.

    100. Re:Two mostly similar choices by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      No. That is incredibly dangerous advice you are giving here, and nobody in their right mind should be listening to you.

      If you knew the term had already been shot down in the courts, why the fuck did you sign it to start with? Why not tell them it's illegal, and refuse to sign?

      And stop talking out of your ass. There are several states where those clauses actually are legal, and can be used against you. Massachusetts is one of them, I'm sure Texas is another. California is one of the few states that I know of where non-competes are not worth the paper they're written on. The person needs to learn the laws IN THEIR STATE to be able to make the decision, and for the most part, just refuse to sign them anyway.

    101. Re:Two mostly similar choices by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      No. Any form of clause like this is not ok, unless they are offering to pay you during this period. Anything else, and they are infringing on my right to work, and my right to provide for myself.

    102. Re:Two mostly similar choices by rossz · · Score: 1

      I've crossed out and initialed things in the employment contracts several times in the past. Most noticably, the clause that says I won't work in the field for x years after leaving them. It's not enforceable in the state of California so has no business being in the contract. I've never had a problem doing this. I also refuse to let them do a credit check. My personal finances are none of their business. Only one time did this become an issue. The company insisted they needed to do the credit check and it was a condition of employment. At this point I told them I was no longer interested in working for them and that I would be reporting them to the labor board.

      --
      -- Will program for bandwidth
    103. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Surt · · Score: 1

      I don't think there's any legitimacy to these contracts at all, I only meant to point out what is probably happening.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    104. Re:Two mostly similar choices by j-pimp · · Score: 1

      No. Any form of clause like this is not ok, unless they are offering to pay you during this period. Anything else, and they are infringing on my right to work, and my right to provide for myself.

      I only need one job to pay myself (or x contracts if I'm an independent consultant where x is certainly less than 100 if I'm charging by the hour). With my employment history, I've never gone to work for a competitor, was interviewed with one, or even approached by one, so even if I wasn't allowed to it didn't affect my market rate or employability. Maybe if I was more highly specialized, that would be a problem. Perhaps with outsourcing that is a reality for sysadmins since most of them work at ISPs. I don't think that is the case for developers, at least in my market (greater NYC). Honestly, I've had two jobs where I didn't even know the name of a direct competitor, so maybe I just see things different.

      --
      --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
    105. Re:Two mostly similar choices by celtic_hackr · · Score: 2

      The thing is, companies really don't own any copyrights or patents, unless some person or group of persons enters into a contract with the company giving them the rights to it. This is usually called an employment contract.

      There are three options when approaching this:

      1) (re)negotiate the contract,
      2) find another employer,
      3) go it on your own.

      Option 1 is best applied before signing an employment contract. Once employed you have far less negotiating leverage. Also, the mere fact of renegotiation alerts the company to warning signs that you may be unhappy at the company or have an idea you think is worth a lot of money which you don't want to share with them, even if it is in a different field. In either event, they are going to be watching you, going forward. Or they will say sure go for it! If they are more enlightened. But given the existing contract, I'm betting on the former.

      Option 2 is probably the best choice, because you obviously aren't the right fit for the existing company.

      Option 3 is your greatest opportunity, but also your greatest risk. You seem to be risk averse. Wanting to use the existing job to finance your new company, rather than just leave now before you've started developing your idea into product. Remember, as an idea, it belongs to you, and even a contract can't take that away. Mere thoughts and ideas aren't patentable or copyright-able. Only once you've transformed the idea into a concrete process of some sort, does it become something you can lose a lawsuit over. That won't stop them from suing you though, if they are so inclined. Not really much can be done about that, except to be prepared and keep excellent records.
      There may also be limits in your contract on how long after you leave you have to wait before developing things. I don't sign these vile types of contracts, and also insist on changes to these boilerplate things. I have accumulated significant copyright on my own, and several patentable ideas in various stages of development.

      Option 4, is to proceed and hide what you are doing, and risk infecting all sorts of projects with encumbered, infringing code or whatever. This is not really an option. It's a pseudo-option, an illusion, a glamour pool. It's a lose, lose situation. It may look attractive from some perspectives, but once discovered, either before or after you come to market you risk losing it all, and more, and discover it was a cesspool idea.

      If you go with option 2, and your idea is not in a competing field, make sure you negotiate for changing the language so you can develop on your own time non-competing ideas.

    106. Re:Two mostly similar choices by patchmaster · · Score: 1

      I have two thoughts on this. First, do you really want to work for such a place? I know jobs are in short supply right now and any job is better than no job, but I certainly wouldn't want to work anywhere that had an issue with me having a non-conflicting side business.

      Second, and more importantly, every place I've ever worked took an exceedingly dim view of people who lied on their application. More than once I've seen good employees disappear in a flash because the employer discovered they'd lied about education or job experience or past brushes with the law. Lying about your outside work will be grounds for dismissal.

    107. Re:Two mostly similar choices by bgman · · Score: 0

      What if you (or, your wife) were to give birth while employed at this company? Do they get your child? Seriously, I'd find a new job or develop your ideas and go into business for your self. Starting my own business was the best decision I've ever made and I have the best boss I've ever had!

    108. Re:Two mostly similar choices by gd2shoe · · Score: 1

      Interesting, I had no idea "trade secret" was state law, and not federal. I just knew it was enforceable but limited in scope. Thanks.

      --
      I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
    109. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Scoth · · Score: 1

      A buddy of mine was a mechanic at a local mom-and-pop auto repair place, and part of the agreement when he started working there was any side-work had to be approved before doing and had to be below some specified amount of money. They didn't want their mechanics poaching work on the side for lower than the shop would charge, effectively undercutting them. This ended up causing him some stress since apparently a large percentage of mechanics do side work to make ends meet.

      Not quite the same thing but close, I guess. I'd expect most service industries would not want their employees competing directly, but the OP's issue would be more like my mechanic friend getting in hot water over helping build a friend's sand buggy. The original shop wouldn't do that anyway, so it's silly to prevent or claim ownership if it's done.

    110. Re:Two mostly similar choices by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      then perhaps you should write your own contract of employment, but remember these things are 2-way affairs, they have to agree to it as well.

      If you have such things in your contract, get them changed. Its not rocket science, its just a little time to read and understand what you are agreeing to. If you don't bother to read it, there's only yourself to blame.

    111. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1
      If you're "always on the clock", you have to be paid for that time, whether you're physically there or not. Optimal Robotics lost that one, in an "at-will" state - they had to pay employees overtime even when they weren't called, because they were "subject to call".

      So, maybe you aren't willing to fight it in court, but others did, and won.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    112. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1
      You're perfectly fine signing a contract that has clauses that are against your rights that are illegal - it makes it that much harder for them to enforce ANY of the contract in court, as it shows bad faith and sharp dealing on their part.

      So of course, when they included a clause with a 5-year non-compete, I was happy to sign it. If it had been a year, the courts might have found that reasonable - but 5 years? Nope - they had already ruled that was way over the line. So, the non-compete was null and void, and I could ignore it if I so chose. Now, being a nice person, I told them after the fact that their contracts were illegal, and they did subsequently change them for new hires - but of course, they STILL tried to over-reach (3 years instead of 5), so they still ended up with the same problem when they'd lay off an employee and he'd go apply for work for a competitor.

      Now, as to your "point" about only a few places having legislation wrt non-competes - we don't have any such legislation here, but that just means that we have recourse to equitable defense of our right to work irrespective of what a non-compete says. If it's not "fair" in the eyes of the court, it will be struck. As an employer, if you don't like that, tell it to the judge - or stop being a greedy pig.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    113. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a short-order cook cannot work from the toilet, but an engineer may have a leap of insight there

      I've leapt for the toilet before, but it wasn't a case of insight....

    114. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Your employer will only need to produce one email, one phone call, or one water-cooler conversation to prove their claim, then you're screwed.

      If your employer is recording your water-cooler conversations, you have much bigger problems, and need to walk away from that job.

      As a producer of IP, the reality is you do not start thinking when you punch on, and stop thinking when you punch off.

      So what? That doesn't mean it's OK to turn people into slaves.

    115. Re:Two mostly similar choices by babthooka · · Score: 1

      Geez, you seem angry... and hungry.

    116. Re:Two mostly similar choices by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      All that mess, and the only thing you're concerned about is "copywrites"?

      Seriously?

      Did you ever think, maybe, just maybe, it was intentional?

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    117. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What difference does it make, shit eater?

      It was an example of what worked for the poster, not what the submitter should be following to the letter. See those first words? "What I did at my current (academic) job...."

      Get the cock out of your mouth, and you might have more time to think.

    118. Re:Two mostly similar choices by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 1

      Your mixing up racism and slavery.

      No, I'm not, but I am making fun of a group of people who like to use both to their political advantage, even as they themselves continue to support other types of slavery.

      The talking point is that democrats are racists who supported slavery. Which was true in the 1860s. But also ironic because current republicans almost universally support intellectual property slavery even as they accuse democrats of racism.

      Hilarious!

      --
      Who did what now?
    119. Re:Two mostly similar choices by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Sure about that? A local pho restaraunt was sold to new owners. After the sale, the food quality dropped. I noticed it, all my friends noticed it.

      Food quality has nothing to do with the recipe, which did not likely change. The thing about food is, the end product varies from chef to chef, simply due to the differences in how its prepared; this is especially true in smaller establishments who don't have a system established for ensuring consistency and quality.

      While technically the old owners sold their recipes, I suspect that they weren't the real recipes. If that's not true, the new owner's cut back on ingredients or something.

      That's a much more likely possibility.

      Why in the world would a restaurant owner be motivated to intentionally destroy something he created (the restaurant and its image) by giving the new owner false recipes? That doesn't make any sense at all.

      And you're quite wrong about recipes not being coveted assets.

      Just because somebody covets something doesn't mean it has actual value to anyone else, or that release of said info would cause any actual harm to said person/company. Anyone with enough money and time can figure out the exact recipe for a commercial food item, or damn close, given the right equipment/knowledge and representative examples to reverse engineer. Do you think the McDonalds executive team stays up at night sweating with worry that someone will figure out their Big Mac recipe and start selling knock off Big Macs, undercutting their sales? Of course not.

      This is because the real value is their name (brand), and all the thought and knowledge that went into creating that brand, and the procedures/supply chain necessary to make and serve food quickly on such a scale, not the specific items they sell. In fact I'm pretty sure you can find a book out there somewhere that will tell you how to make a Big Mac. But if someone wanted to make a business out of selling Big Mac clones, they couldn't, because nobody would buy it, plus McDonalds would sue them into oblivion.

    120. Re:Two mostly similar choices by evenmoreconfused · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the parent I was replying to claimed that "I don't think corporations should be able to hold copyright or patents". That's what my response was to.

      --
      No. Well...maybe. Actually, yes. It really just depends.
  2. What is common depends on Where by icebike · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is quite a bit of variation to be found in the practices of companies with regard to this issue.

    A good write up is found here: http://www.ieeeusa.org/members/IPandtheengineer.pdf

    The article suggest there are two or three broad models of what is acceptable practice in this ares.

    First

    The Massachusetts Model is so called because it is prevalent in the northeastern United States. It was developed toward the end of the industrial revolution as a response to shop rights. Agreements written on this model tend to imply that the intellectual life of the employee is company property.

    Never backed by law, this model is the most restrictive,

    The cycle of innovation and renewal is fundamental to a healthy market economy. To foster this cycle, individuals require the same protections for non-work-related intellectual property that employers enjoy for work-related creations. In 1977, Minnesota formalized this concept with a law limiting the enforceable terms of pre-invention assignment agreements. The Minnesota Model adopts the philosophy that while the employer should enjoy protection, it should not come at the expense of today's employee to become tomorrow's new employer.

    In California there are similar laws to the Minnesota system:

    The State of California followed in 1980, by implementing protection for its famous entrepreneurial culture. As of this writing Utah, Washington, North Carolina, Kansas, Delaware, and Illinois have also promoted new business formation by means of
    similar laws

    The text of the California law is on the web here. Washington state Here.

    Appendix B of the above linked article has a summary of legislation in various states and list of states where such agreements are already limited by state law.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    1. Re:What is common depends on Where by pepty · · Score: 1

      The State of California followed in 1980, by implementing protection for its famous entrepreneurial culture. As of this writing Utah, Washington, North Carolina, Kansas, Delaware, and Illinois have also promoted new business formation by means of similar laws

      I remember when I started grad school in CA in the '90s the IP document I had to sign was so broad it covered literally everything. I could have written a kids novel or built a better mousetrap, either way the document claimed if any of the work was done during the period I was there they could claim it. The reality was that IP assignment was, like many other things, apportioned via the serfdom system: the more clout you had the more control you got.

    2. Re:What is common depends on Where by Kjella · · Score: 1

      That's fine to keep your IP... but it's very hard to keep your job if they no longer want you employed. If you like to be able to do it on the side, hitting them over the head with the law might not be the best approach.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:What is common depends on Where by Peristaltic · · Score: 2

      And that's exactly how they handle it at IBM- You get to choose between your job, and giving them first dibs on anything you may think up on the weekend. A condition of my employment at IBM Global Services was that if I so much as invented a better pair of scissors over the weekend, I was required to present my "invention" to management, or find myself in violation of my terms of employment. No longer work there.

    4. Re:What is common depends on Where by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Next time read it and don't sign it. This is supposed to be negotiable, and if they don't like it, you just drop them. I've had many companies try this on me, telling me I can't do anything about it, so I just get up and leave, 2 days later, they call me up and say I don't have to sign anything.

    5. Re:What is common depends on Where by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      If they're the types of assholes who would require you to resort to the law in order to protect your side project, you're probably better off not working for them.

  3. A Contract Is What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Next time, modify the agreement before you sign it.

    1. Re:A Contract Is What? by Anrego · · Score: 3, Insightful

      May be fine if you have lots of experience and they have specifically saught you out...

      For the rest of the world, people are usually just happy to have snagged a job.. the last thing they are gonna do is start making waves before they even get their first pay cheque. Most "negotiations" regarding this kind of boilerplate "everyone signs it" agreement is along the lines of "your employment is conditional on your signing this, if you'd prefer not to, be sure to turn in your card on the way out!"

    2. Re:A Contract Is What? by Almahtar · · Score: 1

      I've worked for a few places that gave me their invention assignment agreements in .doc format. They wanted me to print it, sign it, give it back.
      If I'd felt the terms were not reasonable I would have just edited it, signed it, and handed it in without a word. Problem solved.
      In my case the terms were reasonable enough so I left them unmodified.

    3. Re:A Contract Is What? by EdIII · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Next time don't even sign it.

      The last W2 job I ever worked tried to force something like this on me as well. My response was a lengthy legal agreement in which it spelled out all IP that I currently owned, was involved in creating, limited the scope of the IP they wanted to control to their specific business domains, etc.

      They never signed mine, and I never signed theirs. Received a couple of threats from HR, stood my ground, and it just quietly went away. Worked at that company for 3 more years without the signed contract.

    4. Re:A Contract Is What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I had one employer applaud me for this sort of ballsyness. However, that's far from the norm. Subsequently, I've had two deny me for even asking questions about the IP protection agreement(s), much less issuing any changes to it. So much for being entitled to seek legal counsel.

    5. Re:A Contract Is What? by the_fat_kid · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Pray I do not modify it again."

      --
      -- Sig under construction...
    6. Re:A Contract Is What? by TheGavster · · Score: 2

      I tried this move at one employer with a very vague and all-encompassing non-compete/IP contract, and while I did keep the job and didn't have the sign, the manager I was working with became extremely irate and basically left the table while we were working out which clauses of the contract I was at odds with. That particular firm was quite small and probably didn't relish the cost of recruiting and hiring a replacement, but at a larger firm where I was one of many new hires I don't doubt I would have been out on the street that afternoon, printed cube nameplate or not.

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
    7. Re:A Contract Is What? by St.Creed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I used to think that as well. Until I came to be in the position to make demands and say "well, too bad" when they didn't want to meet them. As it turned out, if your demands are reasonable, you're probably going to get most of them approved.

      No contract is ever boilerplate. Sure, they have a template. Usually you will find very few people with the contract as originally proposed.

      That having said, being freelancer I can appreciate the IP issues. So what I normally do is tell people in advance which projects I'm working on, and are mine. Just titles and a very short summary. Never had a problem with that.

      I can also appreciate an employer not liking his workers to moonlight. It always spills over into your normal day job, even if it is just lack of sleep because you were so stoked from your new idea that you couldn't sleep. It always affects them. An open discussion about this, showing you understand those issues and how you will make sure they are mitigated, will usually go down well. Not always though - understand how your boss operates before doing anything.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    8. Re:A Contract Is What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I consulted for 13 years book ended by several years with a large firm that was significantly larger the second time.

      Both times I included an attachment that detailed what I was keeping and that they had no rights on the specific inventions. The second time I expanded that to entire ranges of inventions, "language software, gaming software, etc." so it was considerably more extensive then the first time. They signed it both times. The fields specified weren't in conflict with my job or their business goals.

      When my bosses stated that they owned everything I did then I pointed out they were indeed wrong and should actually read my personel file. If that didn't quiet them down then I started in with what format should my emails to my father to include the company copyright and then later asked them for funding the corporate themed porn site. The subject never came up again.

    9. Re:A Contract Is What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have successfully modified most of the boilerplate employment contracts I have had in the last ten years. I mark up what they give me, initial each change, sign it, and return it saying "I made a few changes". They have generally asked for my reasoning, modified one or two items in a way I agree with, and signed the result.

      I think that, rather than being regarded as someone who makes waves, my actions cause me to be looked at as someone with self-respect and initiative who will defend himself and, by extension, his employer.

    10. Re:A Contract Is What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...like adding the words "Without Prejudice" next to your signature. Employment contracts tend to be adhesion agreements anyway.

    11. Re:A Contract Is What? by slimjim8094 · · Score: 2

      Nice try, but it would be an invalid contract because there was no "meeting of the minds" to assent to the new contract. Of course if the terms were unfavorable, you might not be interested in a valid contract, and just wanted to shut HR up... which is fine, but it's not an enforceable contract.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    12. Re:A Contract Is What? by Rakishi · · Score: 2

      Wow, you lack a spine don't you?

      "your employment is conditional on your signing this, if you'd prefer not to, be sure to turn in your card on the way out!"

      And then they either spend another $10k+ looking for another potential employee or hire someone they deemed inferior to you. Finding qualified workers is generally a pain in the ass across the board in IT. So the company is on the hook as much as you are at that point.

    13. Re:A Contract Is What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My employer said they own any ideas I have. I modified (crossed out) that part in my contract when I was signing on. They laughed, gave me a new copy and said take it or leave it. It was 50% more money, so I still took it, but wasn't happy about it. That said, I am paid to work, and am not penalized for not having ideas, so I don't.

      Seems to me it was 3M that encouraged ideas/innovation by making sure if an employee made them rich, the employee got rich too. In my job, if I have an idea, the company could get rich, and I'd have no guarantee of even employment, let alone making a bonus or something. Sucks. But I think they are short sighted and it is their loss.

    14. Re:A Contract Is What? by pla · · Score: 2

      Of course if the terms were unfavorable, you might not be interested in a valid contract, and just wanted to shut HR up... which is fine, but it's not an enforceable contract.

      This.

      The terms of such agreements, without exception, contain nothing even the slightest bit favorable to the employee. Going forward without a valid contract, complete with the possibility of having them send you packing at a moments notice, usually works out more favorably than agreeing to their boilerplate.

    15. Re:A Contract Is What? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 2

      GOOD LUCK WITH THAT.

      each time I tried, they immediately find a reason to say they don't want you anymore. they will pluck another servant from the tree-of-humans.

      you have no bargaining power. NONE. you sign or you walk.

      if you think otherwise, you are dreaming.

      I hate this!! but I've found that this is reality in today's world ;(

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    16. Re:A Contract Is What? by Xeno+man · · Score: 1

      Everything is negotiable, thing can move one way or another. If the employer won't move and you sign it, your the one that moved on your position and chose to give up rights for money. There is always a choice.

    17. Re:A Contract Is What? by Surt · · Score: 1

      But if no IP agreement was what you wanted, mission accomplished, right? No meeting of the minds, no agreement.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    18. Re:A Contract Is What? by demonlapin · · Score: 2

      A company officer would have to have signed it after the submission by the prospective employee in order for it to be a valid agreement. If said officer was silly enough to have signed it without reviewing it and any modifications, well, that's their problem.

    19. Re:A Contract Is What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Next time don't even sign it.

      The last W2 job I ever worked tried to force something like this on me as well. My response was a lengthy legal agreement in which it spelled out all IP that I currently owned, was involved in creating, limited the scope of the IP they wanted to control to their specific business domains, etc.

      They never signed mine, and I never signed theirs. Received a couple of threats from HR, stood my ground, and it just quietly went away. Worked at that company for 3 more years without the signed contract.

      This is what I did 6 years ago. I stalled, didn't return emails, made excuses like I forgot, dog ate it, that sort of thing, and eventually it went away. This is the second time I've done this in the last 15 years. It's surprisingly effective.

    20. Re:A Contract Is What? by Matheus · · Score: 1

      I had a similar situation... A company I worked for got bought and the new bosses tried to shove a document such as this down our throats. I refused and entered into legal negotiations with the new parent company. When all was said and done a significant percentage of our company (the other engineers mostly) sign the document that I negotiated which left us free to own our own work when it wasn't on the company dime or time with a reasonable accounting for non-compete.

      Honestly it was kind of fun but the real answer is "Stick to your ground". If you are not enough of a bargaining chip then unfortunately they will probably let you go. Of course if that's the case then there's a possibility you don't have anything worth keeping them from either but that's the risk you play.

    21. Re:A Contract Is What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My employer asked me to sign something like this partway through employment (which is admittedly a stronger position for me to be in than if they'd asked me during the original employment negotiation.)

      I said I couldn't sign it because it wasn't fair to the FOSS projects I contributed to for there to be any ambiguity in ownership of the IP. My employer said, "Everyone has to sign this as a condition of continued employment, we can't make exceptions".

      I carried on saying no, they said, "Of course this doesn't apply to things that are nothing to do with the company", although the text of the contract did.

      I carried on saying no, and insisted in getting the contract amended in writing to match what they were telling me it did verbally. Which they did.

      Basically most employers aren't interested in getting IP from their employees' side projects. They just want to make sure that if someone tries to thieve their stuff any ambiguity gets resolved in their favour, so they draw the most advantageous line they can get away with. If you stand your ground they'll probably take the path of least resistance. (Although I suppose if you're hardly providing any value to them at all that might be firing you...)

    22. Re:A Contract Is What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like you enjoy being a victim.

    23. Re:A Contract Is What? by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 1

      I've managed it twice now, first with my first job out of university.

      As long as you explain why you want it to change, and the specific reasons / projects / etc, then most HR departments are happy to oblige. Finding competent people is hard, and expensive, so unless you are an unreasonable prick about it then theyre likely to acquiesce

    24. Re:A Contract Is What? by shiftless · · Score: 0

      For the rest of the world, people are usually just happy to have snagged a job.. the last thing they are gonna do is start making waves before they even get their first pay cheque.

      If you walk into a business deal (or employment interview) with that kind of attitude, you DESERVE to get bent over the table and fucked, raw dogged in the asshole over and over, until one day you hopefully wake the fuck up and learn to stop letting people trample all over you.

    25. Re:A Contract Is What? by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      I used to think that as well. Until I came to be in the position to make demands and say "well, too bad" when they didn't want to meet them.

      Ok... but what about those people that aren't in that position yet? Should they just have to endure being fucked over?

      I can also appreciate an employer not liking his workers to moonlight. It always spills over into your normal day job, even if it is just lack of sleep because you were so stoked from your new idea that you couldn't sleep. It always affects them. An open discussion about this, showing you understand those issues and how you will make sure they are mitigated, will usually go down well. Not always though - understand how your boss operates before doing anything.

      Being forced to work long hours at the day job can do this too, yet most employers are not opposed to those.

    26. Re:A Contract Is What? by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Wow, you lack a spine don't you?

      Either that, or they just want to be able to eat.

    27. Re:A Contract Is What? by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      No you do not, and to have the attitude that ANYONE deserves to be fucked over, regardless of attitude, is simply abhorrent. It's assholes like you that enable this shit, and allow it to continue happening.

    28. Re:A Contract Is What? by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Nice try, but it would be an invalid contract because there was no "meeting of the minds" to assent to the new contract

      In which case the terms of the original contract wouldn't be enforceable either. He's no worse off.

      Besides, if he's not able to alter the contract, where is the "meeting of the minds" on his part?

    29. Re:A Contract Is What? by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      I find it extremely disgusting that someone has to be "worth something" in order for their rights to not be trampled.

    30. Re:A Contract Is What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you are a shitty worker.... If you are a valuable employee, you definitely have bargaining power.

    31. Re:A Contract Is What? by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      And if you ever wonder why all those other people are making more money than you it's because they're not too gutless to take minor risks. Granted, if you're screwed up so badly you have no savings or safety nets then you probably aren't going to do well in the future anyway.

    32. Re:A Contract Is What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Become more valuable? I can appreciate how useless some of this "I'm so exceptional I can write my own ticket" advice is to the vast majority of wage slaves, but invest in yourself enough and you don't have to act in desperation.

      Building resume's is the wrong mindset in my opinion. Build your notoriety. Strive to be the first in your industry to do something cool on your own time with your own money. Employers are everywhere, and they are watching what you do.

  4. ask a lawyer by vlm · · Score: 0

    Does anyone have suggestions

    Oh no, not another "ask a lawyer" question.

    As a general rule, this is mostly unenforceable and/or is trivially worked around.

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    1. Re:ask a lawyer by swright · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh no, not another "ask a lawyer" question.

      As a general rule, this is mostly unenforceable and/or is trivially worked around.

      That may be, but life is a lot simpler for everyone if we can all work by mutual prior agreement.

      *all* contracts start in the favour of the people who wrote them. It's a game to make it mutually fair as much as it is to do a decent tax return or haggle for goods at the market. You may not like that it's a game (I don't!), but it is one.

    2. Re:ask a lawyer by Sir_Sri · · Score: 1

      Or get your ass hung out to try, because by even discussing the idea and how you would implement it when you leave work, you are violating your contract with the employer and they'll come after you afterwards if they think you have money they can win in a legal battle.

    3. Re:ask a lawyer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Even if you leave now, you can't prove when you started work, or rather, you can't prove you started working on that side-project after leaving the firm instead of before.

      Meaning, that you'll get sued either way.

      My suggestion is to keep working on your project, but keep it in your head, or at least don't make any tangible evidence. when that contract is up, or you leave, then start working it for real and with lots of documentation every step of the way.

      The question I want to ask: You signed those papers, you knew what you were doing. Why back out now? There's this thing called work ethic. You want to pursue your project, then do the right thing and resign, or, work on it. and your company owns it, who knows, maybe you get something out of it, maybe even more than you would by working on it by yourself. Did you try talking to your manager, or someone above about this? Not all corporations are evil, and slashdotters are rarely right(except for IT&C, of course:)

    4. Re:ask a lawyer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      *all* contracts start in the favour of the people who wrote them.

      you failed contract law

    5. Re:ask a lawyer by The+Rizz · · Score: 2

      The question I want to ask: You signed those papers, you knew what you were doing. Why back out now? There's this thing called work ethic.

      Why is it not ethical for an employee want to keep the rights to something they created and did not get paid by the company for? (Unless they're giving you some kind of bonus for something you create, or you are specifically in a think-tank sort of job, you're NOT getting paid for inventing something for them!)

      It's one thing if you create something as a direct result of your assigned work (i.e., you're building their mousetrap, and figure out how to improve it), but when it's wholly unrelated (perpetual motion), why should they have any claim over it? When it's related (hey, this mousetrap can be modified to catch kittens instead), there should be a process where you bring it to management and they either (a) pay you a bonus for the idea, (b) give you co-ownership of it, (c) devote some of your work hours to the project, or (d) drop all claims so long as you don't devote company resources to it (time/equipment).

    6. Re:ask a lawyer by mikael · · Score: 1

      Because something completely unrelated to their work might actually affect them. Suppose you worked on perpetual motion and your company was an ASIC developer. If you did get perpetual motion to work at desktop size, what if it could be scaled down and etched onto a silicon wafer along with a dynamo? Suddenly, you would change the design of just about every processor.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    7. Re:ask a lawyer by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The contracts are written in favor of the writer, even if future interpretations are to be made in favor of the other party. Or are you telling me that the average cell phone 24-month contract is "fair"? Though in your link you link to a term that essentially proves you wrong "contract of adhesion". Such a term would never have been needed if the writers of contracts didn't abuse that station sufficiently to cause a backlash.

    8. Re:ask a lawyer by wrook · · Score: 1

      But it's a winning the battle and losing the war thing.

      Try finding a job while your previous employer is suing you for IP infringement. If they have a contract, no matter how unenforceable it is, a judge is likely to hear the case. Your previous employer can then drag it out for a very long time at very little cost to them. You, on the other hand, need to explain to every potential employer why you are being sued and how a similar situation will never happen with them.

      The OP is correct. Never sign a contract you don't intend to honor. You are in a terrible situation no matter how unfair the contract is. I was once sued by a former employer for breach of contract. It was completely ridiculous, but they still managed to make my life hell. Luckily I found a job with a gigantic company and their legal team took care of it for me. I'm still unbelievable grateful to that company for their help because without it it would have been a nightmare.

    9. Re:ask a lawyer by Surt · · Score: 1

      Not one of my employers has every done enough research on me to find out I was involved in a lawsuit.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    10. Re:ask a lawyer by Kjella · · Score: 1

      I think you completely failed to understand his point, that is to resolve ambiguities not unfairness. Everybody that drafts a contract does so in the way that is most favorable to themselves, so if your employer created the employment contract it will be favorable towards employers. Contract law is a really long rope to hang yourself with, there's a few exceptions of unconscionable terms but for the most part you're permitted to make and will be held to contracts that are very shitty for yourself. It's usually a bad idea to assume you can wiggle your way out of it in a court of law anyway.

      Maybe it's easier to understand in a business to business setting, where there's a lot more negotiation. I'm sure your company lawyer could give you lots of examples of a supplier-friendly and a customer-friendly contract for delivery of the exact same item or service. They like to give you the impression that this is the standard terms of delivery, either you sign it or you're gone. Same with employee agreements, but in reality it's negotiable. Trust me, they have systems to deal with individual contracts...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  5. TALK to them by swright · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yes - explain why you don't like this, and what you intend to do in your spare time that you wish to retain ownership of.

    These clauses usually come from a desire that employees don't misappropriate company IP and use it to write something competing. Or for a competitor (where the 'who owns what' question becomes murkier).

    Any reasonable employer will write you an exclusion, but likely with a no-compete clause, which is fair enough.

    IANAL, but I write the above as an employer, running a tech team of 21.

    1. Re:TALK to them by tqk · · Score: 0

      Yes - explain why you don't like this, and what you intend to do in your spare time that you wish to retain ownership of.

      Why? Do you pay your employees for 24 hours/day? Why do you consider yourself entitled to things you're not paying for?

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    2. Re:TALK to them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He takes it because he can. Same reason you take it back if the law allows you, even though you signed the document - because you can. There is no notion of entitlement involved, it's all about what you can take and what you can hold. There is no mechanism by which employers and employees can arrive at something that is fair, which is a murky concept anyway, it will only be a question of how the relative negotiating power of employer and employees interact. Employers usually win that one because they are professional people manipulators, while the employees are rank amateurs in that arena. It doesn't matter if the CEO is morally entitled to a 100 million dollar bonus, it only matters that now he has 100 million dollars. When an employer is hiring you, it never crosses his mind what you are worth or entitled to, it only crosses his mind how small of an offer he can make and still have you or someone else qualified take the job. It is about what is possible, not what is fair.

    3. Re:TALK to them by The+Rizz · · Score: 1

      His statements sound completely reasonable, why do you think they make him out to be claiming the employee's whole life?
      He said that they just want to make sure the employee isn't either doing IP-related work for a competitor (fair, since that'll cause no end of IP-related legal issues on anything he's working on), or creating a product that competes with their own products (fair again).

    4. Re:TALK to them by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Any reasonable employer will write you an exclusion, but likely with a no-compete clause, which is fair enough.

      IANAL, but I write the above as an employer, running a tech team of 21.

      A problem with some "reasonable" employers is that so many of them really have *unreasonable* contracts to begin with. Please take a look at his request a little more closely.

      From his wording: "Ideally I'd keep my day job, reserving mornings, evenings and weekends to see if the side-projects could become viable". So I assume that he would intend to leave his current employer if one of his side-projects becomes viable enough (and even if he never intends to leave the company even if he's successful with his side-projects, that would be difficult for him to prove otherwise anyhow).

      As an employer yourself, would you be willing to sign-off on that if that meant you might eventually lose him as a result? Actually, don't answer that. Even if you agree to that, because you're a reasonable manager, a better question would be, do you think your HR department and legal in-house counsel (assuming your company is big enough to have those) would agree to something like that with an existing employee (when unlike you, they don't have a relationship with the employee in question, they probably don't even know him all that well, except for the fact that he's probably a valuable employee and that it may cost the company money down the road if they were to agree to such an exclusion)??

      Some might, especially if as manager you'd be willing push the issue, and if as manager you have a particularly good relationship with HR and legal, but personally, I think that many employers (especially most employers that have such unreasonable contracts to begin with) probably wouldn't.

    5. Re:TALK to them by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Presumably he pays his employees an annual salary, not an hourly wage. In such arrangements, the specific times the employee is "on the clock" and "off the clock" are debatable. That leads to a need for an understanding, so it is clear to both parties that neither is cheating the other. Hence the talking.

    6. Re:TALK to them by SoftwareArtist · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Everyone seems to assume employers are unreasonable and just want to exploit you, but in my experience, many employers are quite reasonable about this sort of thing. The critical point is to be completely open about it and get everything in writing. Explain that you want to develop something on your own time, that you won't use any company resources for it, and that it doesn't compete with anything the company does. Under those circumstances, many companies will have no problem about adding an exclusion to your IP agreement. But if you try to hide what you're doing and don't tell them about it, don't be surprised if they later claim ownership under the agreement that you did, after all, sign.

      --
      "I'm too busy to research this and form an educated opinion, but I do have time to tell everyone my uninformed opinion."
    7. Re:TALK to them by tqk · · Score: 1

      Agreed, I misread him and replied in a kneejerk reaction.

      Still, other employers do think this way, are backed up by laws and lawyers, and a 9 to 5 employee ends up treated like indentured servitude. It ain't right. From 5:01 to 08:59, the employer should have neither say nor claim on said employee nor his works. The law's an ass.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    8. Re:TALK to them by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      If he is any good, he will get another job, and live you now (in the near future), also, he'll not be motivated, and maybe his productivity and work quality will go down if you refuse.

      Compare that with a happy person, that likes working for you, but may, or may not live you in a few years.

      What kind of person chooses the former? (I was going to say a sociopat, but no, sociopats are interested in increasing their own gain.)

    9. Re:TALK to them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take a look at http://unixguru.com before you talk to them. Real-world example of how a corporation can be a back-stabbing SOB.

    10. Re:TALK to them by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 1

      If HR have any fucking clue ad the employee is any good then they will keep the employee happy now, not worry theyre going to leave at some point in the future.

      The default assumption for any employer is (or should be): people will leave.

      Either you fuck them about now, and they leave now when youre not prepared for it - or they leave after a few years, when you can prepare for it.

    11. Re:TALK to them by shiftless · · Score: 1

      When an employer is hiring you, it never crosses his mind what you are worth or entitled to, it only crosses his mind how small of an offer he can make and still have you or someone else qualified take the job.

      Only if he is a fool.....or a typical middle manager, at the risk of being redundant. Consistently paying competent people significantly less than they're worth is a poor business strategy. Also, shopping for a new employee based solely on price tag is a non starter when we're talking about a position that's distinguished enough to require a signed employment contract dealing with intellectual property issues. The end result of applying both of these ill advised strategies would be a company staffed with morons, with the few competent people all searching high and low for the first chance to move on to greener pastures. Sound like any organization you're familiar with?

    12. Re:TALK to them by shiftless · · Score: 1

      As an employer yourself, would you be willing to sign-off on that if that meant you might eventually lose him as a result?

      As an employer, I am not so naive as to believe that it is possible, or at all common, to hire an employee who never quits. Of course I'm going to lose him at some point. The real question is, how much benefit am I going to be able to get from him while he's here? If he's a good or excellent hire, what can I do to keep him around as long as possible and make him happy and productive?

      Don't be penny wise and pound foolish. Treat your employees like they're a key and essential part of your business, yet respect their privacy and ensure they have the maximum available opportunity to live their own lives and pursue their own hobbies which do not directly conflict with the company mission, and your business will be smooth sailing. On the other hand if you treat your employees like expendable drones that can easily be gotten rid of and replaced at a moment's notice over the slightest disagreement, this is the mindset your employees likewise embrace, resulting in low productivity and exodus of talent.

      Even if you agree to that, because you're a reasonable manager, a better question would be, do you think your HR department and legal in-house counsel (assuming your company is big enough to have those) would agree to something like that with an existing employee (when unlike you, they don't have a relationship with the employee in question, they probably don't even know him all that well, except for the fact that he's probably a valuable employee and that it may cost the company money down the road if they were to agree to such an exclusion)??

      Woe unto this entire company: the manager for showing no leadership, HR for being a group of bean counters with no vision, the CEO and his executives for ignorantly or purposely creating and perpetrating this toxic atmosphere of stupidity which will lead the company into its eventual decline and downfall.

    13. Re:TALK to them by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but he's far from reasonable. The desire that company IP isn't misappropriated, or sent to competitors is a reasonable one, but absolutely does not require overreaching "WE OWN YOUR SOUL" clauses in these agreements.

    14. Re:TALK to them by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Why should the employers feelings even come into play here? Why should we give a shit what the employer wants? They're the ones with completely unreasonable demands. They should not have the right to anything an employee does while not at the office (with very, very, very narrow exceptions for things that are directly related to the company's core business).

    15. Re:TALK to them by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Everyone seems to assume employers are unreasonable and just want to exploit you, but in my experience, many employers are quite reasonable about this sort of thing.

      If they really were reasonable, then they wouldn't have put such an overreaching clause in the contract to begin with.

    16. Re:TALK to them by swright · · Score: 1

      hehe, if you feel like that then you will find employers won't care about you...

      but fwiw you're wrong. A great many employers care hugely for the welfare, wellbeing, personal development, skills development and happiness of their employess. But you won't find one to work for while you have that attitude.

    17. Re:TALK to them by swright · · Score: 1

      There are legal advice services for employees too. Sometimes they are even available through the employer (provided by a 3rd party so unbiased). We do this through RBS mentor services. (I don't have a link sorry and cba to google for you ;)

    18. Re:TALK to them by swright · · Score: 1

      They aren't intended to own your soul. I believe (again IANAL) they are intended to start from a position of legal clarity regarding the ownership of software produced by the employee that *may* make its way into company software products.

      Obviously the company has to be clear that it does actually own what it thinks it owns (including its software). The clause prevents cases where the employee may write a nifty library at home, and use it at work as well, before subsequently deciding to sell it to someone else and denying the employer any legal right to use it - or even the choice of whether to use the '3rd party' code.

      I agree there should be processes and people in place to avoid this happening in the first place (not least of which is a code signoff process) - but the 'default' position, as reflected by the contract, is for legal clarity. A reasonable employer should be able to exclude you from it, on the proviso that there are clear ownership rules around what employees write in their own time (plus no-compete rules).

      I would like to reiterate; these clauses are - at least as far as my organisation is concerned - NOT about "we own your soul". Any reasonable employer should be able to come to a mutually agreeable agreement with you if you TALK to them. If they won't....well they probably aren't people you want to work for anyway...

    19. Re:TALK to them by swright · · Score: 1

      As an employer yourself, would you be willing to sign-off on that if that meant you might eventually lose him as a result? Actually, don't answer that. Even if you agree to that, because you're a reasonable manager, a better question would be, do you think your HR department and legal in-house counsel (assuming your company is big enough to have those) would agree to something like that with an existing employee (when unlike you, they don't have a relationship with the employee in question, they probably don't even know him all that well, except for the fact that he's probably a valuable employee and that it may cost the company money down the road if they were to agree to such an exclusion)??

      I'll be frank - but these are my opinions only.

      Yes I would employ them with those caveats in place (and yes signoff can be sought from the other depts involved) - but I do see that as the employee saying "I'll work for you, but only until something else comes along" and to be honest that is a negative. If an employee is borderline at the hiring stage, this would not count in their favour for being hired.

      We want people to be committed to us and for us to be their career, for as long as they choose to remain with us. The perception this gives is that they can/will leave at any time, and while they are with us they won't put in the effort to make it work anyway because they'll also be focusing on their home projects. Some people can make this work, keep the two separate and still give 100% in the day job. Many can't.

      probably a valuable employee

      This is the key bit. On hiring them it is very "probably". Taking on someone new is a risk for the employer as much as it is a big step for the employee, especially for small business.

      The honesty of being clear that they want to do side projects is appreciated (and important!), but to be frank it is a negative. Sorry.

      You may also be right that many employers probably wouldn't...I can only speak from my experience.

    20. Re:TALK to them by swright · · Score: 1

      teehee, you put this so much better than I just did ;)

  6. Use an LLC by K2tech · · Score: 1

    Setup a basic LLC for yourself. Create the items/ideas under that. Document your time spent to show that it did not conflict with your full time job.

    1. Re:Use an LLC by XaXXon · · Score: 2

      But they can just fire you. Ability to do stuff on your own time isn't a protected class.

    2. Re:Use an LLC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      K2tech has the right idea.

      First of all, if you do it on your own time, it is always your property, no matter what. Many HR departments have illegal disclaimers in their policies, you just don't bring it to their attention because you like your job. Just make sure that 100% of the time you spend at work is spent ONLY on your work, and not your side projects.

      Segregate your LLC email and your personal emails. If your personal emails have anything in them that would mention the LLC or the project, that is where the lines are no longer black and white, and you may have a problem.

      If you happen to go to lunch and mention the project to someone else or ask any questions, you need to compensate them for their time, usually through a free lunch. This is one of the better ways to ensure that you are documenting your time, on your time and other people's, never company time, and your IP will always stay yours.

      Never plug a flash drive into a company PC that has anything that you have been working on loaded on it. Some companies auto-copy a flash drive plugged into it to be viewed at IT's leisure.

      Never copy anything from your company onto your personal PC. If you wind up getting sued, you may have to have your harddrive cloned as evidence that can and will be used against you.

      Good luck with your venture!

    3. Re:Use an LLC by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      Unless you have some sort of employment contract that specifies otherwise, you live in an at-will state and can be fired at any time without cause.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    4. Re:Use an LLC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If you wind up getting sued, you may have to have your harddrive cloned as evidence that can and will be used against you."

      Whatever happened to the 5th amendment?

    5. Re:Use an LLC by gknoy · · Score: 1

      5th amendment is about testimony. Providing evidence (past tax returns, bank history, hard drive contents, etc) is what subpoenas are for. Yes, you do have to provide it.

    6. Re:Use an LLC by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

      Setup a basic LLC for yourself. Create the items/ideas under that. Document your time spent to show that it did not conflict with your full time job.

      Then watch them take all your hard work in house as they legally own it. Also, they may well fire you for moonlighting depending on what other crap they put in your contract.

      Creating an LLC is no guarantee against them doing this as you will own the LLC and their employment contract is with you and not the LLC. If they want to sue you for something they can sure you directly so the LLC offers you not protection. They could also probably just take the LLC as an asset from you if it was based entirely on their work.

      Most companies put this sort of crap in contracts as an insurance policy to protect them from you using business knowledge you were gaining during your day job to produce a competing product. Assuming you are not doing this, your employer may well just let you produce other stuff on the side in your own time if you ask them nicely. If your employer does not want you to do this though then you really should just walk and get another job that will let you. This is assuming such a job exists, every job I ever had put a similar clause in my employment contract.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    7. Re:Use an LLC by shiftless · · Score: 0

      Yes, you do have to provide it.

      Only if you're a pussy, or a moron. "Want my hard drive? OK here ya go judge, here's one with a freshly loaded copy of Ubuntu, with 'touched' timestamps and a couple years of simulated usage to support my assertion that this is the same hard drive I've been working off of daily for two years, since my prior hard drive crashed. Note the complete lack of evidence of anything which could possibly negatively impact me in this trial!"

    8. Re:Use an LLC by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Only an idiot would actually do that. Destroying evidence is extremely bad for you, and would probably end up damaging your case far more than the real evidence would.

    9. Re:Use an LLC by K2tech · · Score: 1

      Yes, they could just fire you. But what would be the point? I do consulting on the side - my boss knows about it and could care less as long as it doesn't conflict with my job. I'm also a skydiving instructor and that has been raised as a concern an righfully dismissed. If I were to create something (on the side) that made me wealthy, I have no worries about any employer trying to step in and take it, again as long as it did not directly conflict.

  7. Attorney time by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Time to talk to an attorney to see what is legal in your state.

    often times the 'restrictions' you are required to sign aren't actually legal and are designed just to scare you, but unless they are challenged they stick.

    If you find out its OK, with a company like that breathing down my neck id still document everything i do off hours so i can clearly show it was done on my time, with my materials if it ever came to that point. " Code section created x-date/time" "Receipts of hardware and software", etc.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Attorney time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can you prove you didn't think about it/ develope the idea on company time? Development and implementation are sepatate concepts after all.

      If its similar in nature to what they pay you for, expect their lawyers to go after you. Get yourself a lawyer now and find out what's legal where you are.

    2. Re:Attorney time by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      I strongly agree with this. I'm pretty sure this isn't enforcable where I live, but you'd have to check with you friendly neighbourhood lawyer to make sure.
      Imagine if a friend asked you to come over one week end, and help him finish his software proyect. BAM, all IP goes to your employer? That makes absolutely no sense.

    3. Re:Attorney time by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Have fun paying lawyer bills.

      If you can avoid paying an attorney, I'd suggest avoiding it. Attorneys don't have magic sources of information. Look it up yourself.

      And attorneys always offer advice based on this premise:
      - Pretend the other side is evil, and out to get you
      - Pretend you like going to court and want to spend lots of time there
      - Do things so you'll somehow eventually win in court, after spending enormous amounts of time and money fighting.

      They'll tell you to keep careful documentation that will help your case and to avoid keeping any documentation that might hurt your case.

      If you don't think your project is worth spending lots of time in court, do what people who stay out of court do: Be a good person. Don't lie. Work with the people around you to make sure they know what you're doing. Make sure they're reasonable people who can be trusted. Be their friend. Put your employer's interests ahead of your own. Make it transparent. Get them to agree you can work on your project and you'll still own it. Get this agreement in writing. Follow up periodically, making sure they are still satisfied with your work and they're not bothered by your moonlighting. Get this in writing.

      You need to get it in writing because, even though your employer is reasonable and trustworthy, at some point they may talk to an attorney. See above for the way the attorney will look at the situation. You need to be able to appeal to your employer's reason and trustworthiness and friendship. Otherwise, they might listen to their attorney and you'll end up in court. As the defendant, even if you win, you'll lose.

    4. Re:Attorney time by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      To expand on your point, if what you are working on as a side project is not related to what your employer does, it is improbable that the clause giving them IP rights to it would stand up in court. If on the other hand it is something in exactly the same market as what you work on during the day, it is unlikely that you will be able to get out of that clause by any means (this will vary by state). If it is somewhere in between the degree to which that clause is enforceable will vary from state to state.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    5. Re:Attorney time by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Have fun paying lawyer bills.

      If you can avoid paying an attorney, I'd suggest avoiding it. Attorneys don't have magic sources of information. Look it up yourself.

      A good lawyer will save you far more money than they actually cost. And for something like this, odds are they'll give you an initial consultation hour for free.

    6. Re:Attorney time by Kohath · · Score: 1

      I guess I've never heard of anyone who found a "good lawyer" by this criteria then.

      Usually people just spend a lot of money to get documents written and read. Then the lawyer suggests unreasonable, extremely one-sided changes. Then the other guy's lawyer counter-offers extremely unreasonable one-sided changes. This goes on until people get tired of paying lawyers to cause trouble.

  8. Just change your terms of employment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give your employer written notice that you are unilaterally varying the terms of your contract of employment to rescind that part of the policy due to your weekend work on other projects, and that your continued employment will constitute their acceptance of your change. They're pretty unlikely to give a toss about what you get up to on the weekend, thus you'll keep your job and won't have the worry of that policy.

    1. Re:Just change your terms of employment... by mwvdlee · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Or... and I know this is going to sound insane... ask your boss if it'd be okay before going all agro on them.
      That way you could keep your job even if they wouldn't mind you doing stuff on the side.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:Just change your terms of employment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, talk to them. A written notice may be needed afterwards as a formality in the process, but *start* with discussion.

      I had an identical clause in an employment contract with a Boeing subsidiary. At the beginning --- so when I was taking the job with them --- I expressed a desire to negotiate that part of the contract before I would sign it. The managers said they'd have to talk to the lawyers first. But then, some days later, they just gave me another contract with that clause totally removed. So in the end, no negotiation even happened, and everything was cool.

    3. Re:Just change your terms of employment... by shiftless · · Score: 1

      ask your boss if it'd be okay before going all agro on them.

      No, wrong. Why would you ask your boss if it's "okay"? Of course it's OKAY to be working on your own projects in your own personal time without owing the company a damn thing. Jesus, what kind of society have we become if you always have to ask your "boss" if something is "OK"? What if he says no, what then? You just mumble "OK" and slink back to your cubicle?

      No, if you're a businessman or want to act like one you do exactly what the GP suggested: draw up a new agreement which changes/alters the previous agreement. It doesn't have to be complicated, difficult to read, or more than one paragraph even. Bring up your concerns with the employer. When he expresses verbal concerns of empathy with your position, pull out the contract and have him sign it. If he refuses or tries to play you off with excuses, then start looking for another employer. Odds are he will back off if you are serious about standing your ground, but if he's not, you need to have the fortitude to stick with your convictions and ditch this company. Otherwise your convictions aren't worth the paper they're printed on.

    4. Re:Just change your terms of employment... by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      It's called being civil, and being a human being. Kindness is usually appreciated far more than making ultimatums. And remember, you still have to work with these people for the foreseeable future. Giving them an ultimatum like that is a surefire way to make your day job suck a lot more.

      Yes, you should draw up the amendment to the contract, but don't beat your boss over the head with it. Approach him like a person.

    5. Re:Just change your terms of employment... by TimmyRt · · Score: 1

      Just say to your boss "I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further".

  9. Have you talked to your boss? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Usually the easiest answer is the most straightforward one: Have you talked to your boss whether they could grant you special dispensation from that IP clause so you can pursue your dream? Everything else would be legally shaky (except if you happen to live in a country like Germany, where AFAIK such a clause would be illegal unless you used company resources for your project or did it on company time). So unless a lawyer tells you that clause is illegal in your contract, the only safe options you have is get your boss to waive that clause (or enough of it to allow your project), or to quit your job. And even when a lawyer tells you it is illegal, you should probably talk to them.

    The last thing you want to do is show up at a future new employer after just having sued your previous employer. Nor do you really want to stay at an employer you've had to sue. All contracts eventually rely on trust. If that's not there anymore, you won't enjoy your job much.

  10. You can't negotiate by OzPeter · · Score: 2, Interesting

    After the contract has been signed.

    So basically they have you by the short and curlies. But if you do try to hide stuff and manage to make it big time - hope that you make enough to hire a decent lawyer who will tie your current employer in knots. I hear that East Texas can be friendly for that sort of litigation.

    OTOH you can always delve into IP that while legal, would be the sort of thing that your current employer would find repulsive. What was that link again? 1 girl, 2 D sized cups???

    But one final comment. You say that "I am very happy with my current job", but given that you are trying to circumvent your employment contract I'd argue that you are not happy with your current job.

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    1. Re:You can't negotiate by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      But one final comment. You say that "I am very happy with my current job", but given that you are trying to circumvent your employment contract I'd argue that you are not happy with your current job.

      It's not possible to have one gripe with your current job while still enjoying it?

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    2. Re:You can't negotiate by OzPeter · · Score: 1

      It's not possible to have one gripe with your current job while still enjoying it?

      To say "I like my job, but there is this major part of it I want to change" is self deluding. Once you get past that then you can see what is really important to you.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    3. Re:You can't negotiate by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      But the part he finds flawed might not be big enough to make him dislike the job as a whole.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    4. Re:You can't negotiate by OzPeter · · Score: 1

      But the part he finds flawed might not be big enough to make him dislike the job as a whole.

      But until he can admit that his overall job package is flawed (ie it is more restrictive than what he wants), he really can't seek an honest solution.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    5. Re:You can't negotiate by epine · · Score: 1

      You say that "you like being alive", but given that you are trying to circumvent dying I'd argue that you are not happy with being alive.

      The word "job" is often used to mean just the responsibilities and the primary compensation. Language as metaphor, you know. Implicit counterfactuals abound.

    6. Re:You can't negotiate by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You are asserting a constraint that he never did, then asserting what he thinks based on a constraint you seem to be the only person asserting this constraint. I can like my job and hate one and only one coworker. I can like my job and not like one aspect (travel, on-call, etc.) You are asserting that unless you are 100% satisfied with all separate aspects of something individually, then it's a lie to say you are satisfied with the subject as a whole. I would guess most people would disagree with you. And your best justification so far has been "nuh uh."

    7. Re:You can't negotiate by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      I really enjoy pizza. But I'd love some lasagna.

      That something is good and makes me happy, doesn't mean that there isn't something that's better that can make me even happier.

    8. Re:You can't negotiate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are asserting that unless you are 100% satisfied with all separate aspects of something individually, then it's a lie to say you are satisfied with the subject as a whole. I would guess most people would disagree with you. And your best justification so far has been "nuh uh."

      I suggest you read what you just wrote.

      To break it down logically:**
      A is a set.
      A is defined as containing elements which all satisfy X.
      B is a set.
      A contains a subset of B.
      B is defined as containing all elements which do NOT satisfy X.
      Therefore, A is clearly NOT X... but you are trying to claim that A IS still X which is irrational.

      Bluntly, if there is one thing you don't like then you do partially dislike your job. Other jobs may be worse but that is not the statement being discussed (this 2nd statement seems to be the strawman you are building).

      ** [A=All elements which make up a job. B=All possible elements you would dislike if they were part of your job. X is 'is satisfying in a job']

    9. Re:You can't negotiate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I make $40/hour at my "regular job". Love it, great folks, great benefits, new gear. But it is nice to be able to stretch my mind in different areas and keep it nimble in ways that my current job does not allow. I think both current / moonlighting get the better end of the deal because of each other.
      For me its cross-training.

    10. Re:You can't negotiate by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      "Like" is not an absolute. Lets play another logic game. Rate everything from 1-10, and anything 7 or up is "like".
      Boss: 8
      IP policy: 4
      compensation: 10
      flexible hours: 9

      Overall satisfaction: 8.

      Your assertion that he's lying if he comes up with an overall rating of greater than his lowest score. That's even more absurd than your incorrect objectification of the subjective scale of "like."

    11. Re:You can't negotiate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > You can't negotiate After the contract has been signed.
      well, at least in my country you can sign any shit you want as long as it is prohibited by law (eg. being legally bound to do unpaid work) and just dont give a damn about the section of the contract.

    12. Re:You can't negotiate by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      After the contract has been signed.

      Yes you can. You just need something to negotiate with. New contracts that supercede existing contracts are signed all the time for all sorts of reasons. If they want to hang on to their employee and it costs them nothing then they'll probably be willing to sign a waiver.

    13. Re:You can't negotiate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "You can't negotiate after the contract has been signed."

      Not all employers are assholes. I signed such a contract, then get offered a small bit of work on the side, and my employer was happy to change the agreement. If I did work for an asshole I'd be looking for a new job anyway.

    14. Re:You can't negotiate by shiftless · · Score: 1

      You can't negotiate after the contract has been signed.

      False. You can negotiate in ANY situation in which you have leverage. Maybe you just need to wait until the time is right, i.e. it's crunch time and every hand is needed to ship the product in a few weeks. Now you raise your "growing concerns" about "certain aspects" of the employment contract, and press until the suitable changes are made.

      If management is initially unresponsive, then you start hinting subtly about the possibility of quitting and moving on to a different employer (idea: create a fake "job offer" email from a competitor, with generous terms, and leave it open on your workstation at the right time when you walk away so your manager is sure to see it.) Or maybe hint around that you are thinking of quitting outright to start your own company in a totally unrelated field. Make sure to put plenty of effort into highlighting (during this same time frame) how much your continued participation in this company benefits their bottom line, subtly implying that it's in their best interests to accommodate you.

      Don't be confrontational at all. Stretch it out over a couple weeks if you can with small hints here and there, and cause management to grow *concerned* about that you *might* decide to quit, instead of making ultimatums which you will be forced to follow through on if they disagree. Butter them up then move in for the kill. You put pressure on them at the right time, in the right manner, and bluff as much as necessary, and believe me, you can get damn near anything you want within reason.

    15. Re:You can't negotiate by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      Not only that, you often can negotiate after the contract has been signed. This depends partly on the size of the business, with a medium-large business talk to the legal department and hope for the best. With a small business they probably used a form-contract and would be more willing to make changes. Finally, in some jurisdictions (CA for one) such a clause is not legally enforceable.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    16. Re:You can't negotiate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be self-deluding if it was a major part. In this case it isn't part of the job that is an issue, but a stipulation of the contract which wasn't an issue until now. Since if he didn't have a contract it the job would still be the same, it isn't a contradiction to say he likes the job while not being happy with the contract.

  11. Ethics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    If you signed an agreement saying that you would turn relevant IP over to your employer during your employment there, then not doing so would be unethical. It seems that what you're asking us to do is help you either break the law or be unethical. If your side project is truly not the property of your employer (e.g. you work for a car company and you are inventing a new gardening technique on the side) then you are legally protected to pursue it and patent it yourself.

    By the way, the agreement that you signed, almost certainly says that ideas you developed while employed there belong to them, regardless of whether you quit the job to pursue them or not. Not only would it be unethical to do so, they could sue you and get the patent rights. Some clarification on your situation might be nice because I don't really understand why you're asking /. to help you break the law.

    1. Re:Ethics by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's also unethical for an employer to claim ownership of something that was a) not created on request of said employer and b) where the employee was not compensated for.
      What you're basically are saying is that the dinner you make at home after work is property of the company you work for. That's rather ludicrous.

      Also... ethics... it's just like religion. Everybody has their own set of rules.

    2. Re:Ethics by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      are we talking about legal (contracts) or ethics?

      the two are not (at all) the same.

      ethics are what you want: but legal wise, the company is the one proposing the job contract, NOT you. its entirely one sided in their favor. by design. anyone who has worked a few jobs knows this.

      you either sign or walk. they don't take 'edits' anymore. someone told the companies they 'didnt have to' anymore and so they stopped. I used to be able to get edits in; but in this market (still very very bad) you cannot even hope to dictate to them!

      don't be foolish. if you are lucky and the contract they give you is good, you're good! if its not favorable, it never will be and you should either deal with it or walk. THERE ARE NO EDITS ANYMORE. its really sad and I hate this about the 'new greed' in america, but its still a fact. the corporate bastards own shit and that's that.

      work for a small company who has less struture and more flexibility; but if you even TRY to tell google or someone big that you intend to do this or that on 'your' time, they'll tell you to pound sand.

      perhaps someday the balance will return. but I'm not seeing it right now. contracts from big corps totally own your ass, lock stock and barrel. ask a lawyer to review your hiring contract and ask him. you'll see.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    3. Re:Ethics by shiftless · · Score: 1

      If you signed an agreement saying that you would turn relevant IP over to your employer during your employment there, then not doing so would be unethical.

      This is utter nonsense. If I sign an agreement forfeiting my life and unborn son, only because I was in a high pressure situation "following the crowd" in which I was not able to think clearly and understand exactly what I was agreeing too, while the person writing the contract has purposely taken advantage of my ignorance and indeed set the entire situation up this way, so that he can stealthily slips these provisions through right under my nose.......you're saying I'm the asshole, if I later realize what I've agreed to and refuse to honor an horrible contract?

      Wow, you have a REALLY warped view of "ethics."

  12. Loopholes? Workarounds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The problem is: my employer has an IP policy that states that anything I do while under their employ is theirs, even when I'm off the clock. Does anyone have suggestions about workarounds, magic loopholes, false identity for the side projects? Anything?

    Have you actually talked to them about it? Outline the sort of projects you want to work on, see what undertakings they'd need and what they're prepared to agree to. Do you really make a habit of looking for workarounds and loopholes in the agreements you enter into? If that's really your thing then talk to a lawyer, but otherwise talk to your employer and decide whether you want to stay with them or whether you want to purrsue your projects or whether you can amicably do both.

  13. What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Why is this even legal?

    1. Re:What? by AG+the+other · · Score: 2

      Why is this even legal?

      It isn't in some states.

      --
      Non bene pro toto libertas venditur auro
    2. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because it kind of sucks for the company if you hire 20 people to think up brilliant ideas, pay them for a year, and when they come up with something worth billions, they all leave and make a start-up and do it themselves.

    3. Re:What? by The+Rizz · · Score: 1

      Why is this even legal?

      Because it's not illegal. (Anything you sign in a contract, no matter how awful, is legally binding unless the law makes it unenforceable. In other words, contract law uses a blacklist, not a whitelist.)

    4. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wait... so the solution is to assume that someone will do that, and then take ownership of all of someone's ideas because some people might decide to rip you off?

      Guilty until proven innocent indeed (not a mindset I care for in many situations). I think that unless you can prove they created something while consuming company resources, you should be out of luck.

    5. Re:What? by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      It has happened a lot. That's why these contracts exist.

      Fun fact: when I bought a house I got a contract for all of the non-fixed items in the house that were to either remain or be removed. My real estate agent told me "everything on this list is here because a lawsuit has been fought over it" - including the doorbell, the lights, and the coathangers. And that's basically the same with these types of contracts.

      Also, most people come up with improvements on stuff they see in their daily jobs. That certainly has a relation with what they get paid for, which is to put their best effort into the job. Keeping improvements for yourself is not doing the best job you can.

      So from the employers side, I can understand this. Normally I'd say talk to them about it, but this may not be an option.

      However, usually you can do two things:
      (a) don't talk to anyone until you are convinced (and have convinced others) that you have a solid idea. Then get feedback from people that are not in the company.
      (b) if it's really big and you can find investors, leave the company. Spend enough time outside the company to make it acceptable that you developed your idea after leaving.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    6. Re:What? by shiftless · · Score: 1

      It has happened a lot. That's why these contracts exist.

      Yes, and people smoking marijuana happens a lot. That's why drug laws exist.

      Just because something exists, doesn't mean it's righteous, or the best way of doing things.

  14. Have you asked? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You know, you could simply ask your employer for a waiver for a specific project. They're often happy to do so for anything that's not related to their business. (These kinds of IP policies are often simply to give them the opportunity to make that determination.)

    They might impose a few requirements like not using company time or resources, but that's hardly unreasonable.

    Then again, since you're asking about creating a false identity, it sounds like they might have very good reason not to trust you on this.

  15. Ask your lawyer or quit your job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quit your job. Clearly not your first option as stated in the summary. However, the problem is that any workarounds you use are just likely to work as long as your side project is small and invisible. At some point, if a side project took off, then you would presumably be interested in pursuing that full time and under your own legal name. That's precisely the point at which your employer is going to get interested and start digging. Given the language in your contract, your employer will at least think they have a legal leg to stand on which implies a good chance they'll take you to court. At that point, it becomes a contest between your lawyer and their law team. Thus, your first step is really to ask your lawyer. If you're not willing to pay a small amount to get some advice now, you can expect to wish you had later when the price or lost revenue is much larger.

  16. Enslavement by Grindalf · · Score: 0

    This is enslavement, your employer is liable to prosecution under US federal law. Look it up, there have been a few prominent cases in the media recently ...

    --
    The purpose of existence is to make money.
    1. Re:Enslavement by cavreader · · Score: 1

      "Enslavement" is being forced to do something against your will with no recourse. If you don't like your employers contract you are free to leave or reject the job offer as you see fit. Nobody is forcing you to do any thing.

    2. Re:Enslavement by julesh · · Score: 1

      "Economic slavery" is being in a position where you must do something because the cost of not doing it is too high. Note that while most developed countries have a system for paying those who cannot find work a minimum amount of money required to enable them to survive, it is quite frequently the case that either (1) leaving a job voluntarily or (2) refusing a job that you have been offered terminates your entitlement to such handouts. So if you have a job offer in your hand, and no other prospects, "slavery" is not necessarily the wrong term.

    3. Re:Enslavement by cavreader · · Score: 1

      And what would you suggest we do about it? Should productive members of society be responsible for supporting those who contribute nothing? Nothing in life is fair but in some systems and countries you do have the ability to change your life through education, personal dedication, and hard work. This path requires accepting both hardships and sacrifice. I went to college using loans and a few scholarships that were awarded more by need than any excellence in scholarship. I worked part time jobs throughout my time in college to be able to afford the education without over burdening my parents with the cost. I also relied on student loans that have very reasonable interest rates and are flexible on the re-payment schedules. I know a lot of people that did the exact same thing to achieve there educational goals.
      I honestly don't know how the government can totally do away with poverty but if you were to take all the money from the top 1% and divided it equally amongst all citizens the only thing that will occur is that everybody will be equally poor.
        My point is that "Slavery" is an inflammatory word that does not apply and creates higher levels of animosity for those trying to solve the problems. Accurate terminology is becoming a rarity on the web because people want headlines and one of the easiest ways to do this is by using outrageous words and descriptions for just about any issue we face today. One example of this would be the labels and accusations thrown at Isreal. People declare Isreal is perpetrating "genocide" but the facts do not even come close to satisfying the basic elements in the definition of "genocide". The people they are supposedly committing this heinous act upon has seen a 40% growth in their population and have an economy that is posting the highest growth rates in the region. I am not justifying all of Israel's policies but there will never be peaceful settlement until people on all sides start using the truthful statements and descriptions in their arguments. The use of this word also distorts the monstrous actions that took place in WW2. Over time people will not remember the horror of what "genocide" really such acts.

  17. Don't use any company resources either. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That's one thing we had to remember when we were doing an after-hours
    startup. Everything was on separate machines, no trace of the startup
    was to be on the employers systems.

    But as always, talk to a lawyer.

  18. Get a lawyer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get a lawyer, find out what your options are, then talk to your boss. There is a chance a contract that broad might not be enforceable or that the company lawyer who wrote it was being over cautious and no one has really pointed out to management that as-is is not appropriate.

    I was in a similar position once that a company asked me and all other employees after I had been hired and working there for several months to sign a new policy similar to this. I refused, explained my issue with the contract. A few days later I found myself explaining the issue to the company owner and he agreed. They wrote me a new contract (apparently I was the only one that didn't sign) which I found acceptable that didn't try to claim ownership of my off the clock activities.

    Personally if they can't accommodate that, I don't care how much you like that job, Anyone that blatantly disrespects your time away from work like that is not worth working for. We have jobs so that we can have the money to do what we want and need when not working, To have money but still not be able to fulfill your wants and needs outside the job kinda defeats the purpose.

  19. Read things before you sign them. by Pathwalker · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You should have negotiated this before you started employment.

    Once, when I objected to terms that would have granted the company ownership over everything I did outside of work, they just swapped out that page with another one they had ready. The different terms were there and ready, but just not the default. They were perfectly happy to give me the rights to my own projects, as long as I was willing to ask for them.

    It does suck when you didn't pay attention to what you signed, and are stuck in a bad situation, and it can be hard to fix these things after the fact.

    Your best option would probably to look for another job, and pay attention to what they are asking you to sign.

    Hopefully you don't have any long term non-competes, or other clauses.

    1. Re:Read things before you sign them. by Salgak1 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I faced this several years ago: the company I worked for had a similar policy. But when I signed on, I negotiated a standing exemption for my songs and my fiction: when posed reasonably ( and a few previous samples of each provided), they had no problem exempting them. After all, they were paying me to engineer and implement systems, not write lyrics or short stories. . .

    2. Re:Read things before you sign them. by QuasiEvil · · Score: 1

      One of my coworkers was asked to sign something similar when he joined the company, and he just amended the agreement to say that work only owned what was developed on work time or with work resources. Legal just signed off without any argument.

      Clarifying this stuff up front would have been best, but you can approach your HR/legal department and explain what you're doing. Most of the time it's just there to keep you from developing something great related to your field and then running off selling it to whomever, rather than keeping it in house as a competitive advantage (or selling it through the company). My employer could care less if I design/sell stuff on my personal time, as long as it's not related to work.

    3. Re:Read things before you sign them. by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      Once, when I objected to terms that would have granted the company ownership over everything I did outside of work, they just swapped out that page with another one they had ready. The different terms were there and ready, but just not the default. They were perfectly happy to give me the rights to my own projects, as long as I was willing to ask for them.

      That's interesting... I just quietly drew a diagonal line through the paragraphs that would have prevented me from working on my projects and initialled them, as this is the agreed method of striking text from a contract. I signed the contract, so did the HR rep, and I was hired. The amended contract came up only one time: My 1st performance review wherein I was confronted about an "unapproved" side project I had posted about on my blog.

      "Look, I've been creating software since I was ten. The report in front of you shows just how good I am at it. I write code for fun, Hell, I even invent solutions in my sleep. I'll not sign a new contract that takes away my hobbies -- my real life's work -- any sooner than you would sign one that said you couldn't watch TV / Movies, Build & Sail Boats, Write Novels, or Play & Mod Video Games; Not without fair compensation for such strict restrictions, that is. These are the terms I've agreed to, which are signed and initialled by official company representatives, and thus I have worked under them these past months without issue... My hobbies don't intersect with my work life any more than yours do. We'll have to re-negotiate my compensation if you want me to sign a different contract."

      I worked for them for a few years, and left on good terms without ever having to sign another contract. During the exit interview I suggested they revise the employment contract, or create an alternate one that's less restrictive... It's nice to see some companies have actually done so. :-)

    4. Re:Read things before you sign them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be daft. All contracts can be renegotiated if both parties want a change.

  20. Sounds weird to me. by Gonoff · · Score: 1

    Can that be a legal requirement?

    If I do something legal in my own time on my own equipment in my own home with my own ideas, it has nothing to do with my employer. Surely that cannot stand up in court?
    But I do not have your constitution to 'protect' me.

    --
    I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
    1. Re:Sounds weird to me. by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      Absolutely it can be legal it depends on the jurisdiction and how close the stuff you do in your own time is to your day job eg if you do embedded design at work but develop an nosql system in your spare time you might be OK.

      Certainly both US and UK employment law has similar roots so unfortunately employees get the short end of the stick here. IANAL but I am an "approved" person as defined in UK Law and I have had this discussion with some one who is now in a senior HR role in a FTSE 100 Tech company.

    2. Re:Sounds weird to me. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      It's certainly legal for them to put it in there, but as for whether it's enforceable is something that's not settled (it likely is in some states and not in others).

    3. Re:Sounds weird to me. by Gonoff · · Score: 1

      If you put things in a contract that you know to be against the law, is that not against the law? If not, maybe it should be.

      --
      I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
    4. Re:Sounds weird to me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If one's W2 employer offers health insurance and/or other benefits, those benefits may be the nexus that the employer uses to "own" one's time off. If one came up with an idea on a paid holiday, the employer may argue that the positive environment afforded by that paid holiday was material in that idea leaping into existence.

      Law is a game that the elites always win and the common person always loses.

    5. Re:Sounds weird to me. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between explicitly illegal and unenforceable. Putting in "the secretary will deliver one blow job per day to the boss and whomever the boss selects that day." is explicitly illegal and could land the contract writer in jail. Putting in something unenforceable will result in that clause stricken (assuming a standard severability clause is included) or the whole thing struck (without a severability clause).

    6. Re:Sounds weird to me. by CayceeDee · · Score: 1

      Unless your in porn.

  21. ask a lawyer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Our speculation is worthless. Ask a lawyer. It's their job...

  22. Ask EFF or ACLU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm just a law student, but that sounds like a policy that would not stand up to judicial scrutiny. One key factor is the state you are in. For example, California tends not to recognize non-compete agreements while other states do. So it's possible some states would be more likely than others to find your particular IP agreement invalid. I suggest contacting a public interest org like EFF or ACLU to see if they know of any case law in your state that has found an IP agreement like yours invalid.

    1. Re:Ask EFF or ACLU by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      You might want to check with your lecturer that covers employment law and its not a non compete in this case more theft of trade secrets I would imagine - I doubt the EFF or the ACLU is going to be into reforming employment law.

    2. Re:Ask EFF or ACLU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, the spillover into OSS means that FSF might.

  23. New job by mbone · · Score: 1

    Seek a new job. Otherwise, if your invention or code makes any money, expect to be sued.

  24. Have you talked to them about it? by dirk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The first step should be to talk to them about it and see if they will revise it for you. I work for a company that took a boilerplate IP Policy and wanted to roll it out (like I'm sure many companies do). When they did this, I talked to them and asked them to change it because the way it was written, they basically controlled anything I did. I cited the fact that they could use it for anything from claiming rights to a novel I would write, to any invention I came up with, to even using it to force me to take down a personal website I designed for myself. They obviously replied with "but we wouldn't do that" so I asked them to change it since they had no plans to ever do any of that. I rewrote the agreement to include anything worked on during company time or anything directly related to company work, and they had no issues with that. If you are happy with your employer, and have a good relationship with them, going tot hem should be your first step. If they are reasonable (which is a big if depending on the company and area of business) they hopefully won't have any issue changing it.

    --

    "Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
  25. A practical matter by cgenman · · Score: 1

    As someone who has been in that situation: go talk to your employer. Some will allow you to modify your employment contract to cover the umbrella case of IP outside of work hours. Some will officially sign over rights to you on a particular side project you're working on. Some simply can't do either, as they have iron-clad contracts with other people who require that clause for rights clarity purposes. Some will offer to partner with you on the project, or otherwise compensate you for the idea but have it within their system.

    If you're in one of the states where outside work is generally exempt from these contracts (California, for example), then you probably don't need to go to your employer necessarily. But it will help cut off a potentially expensive lawsuit in the future.

    And if you're not in one of the states that explicitly grants exemptions, don't just go ahead expecting that you'll win the legal battle.

    1. Re:A practical matter by Que_Ball · · Score: 1

      And if you're not in one of the states that explicitly grants exemptions, don't just go ahead expecting that you'll win the legal battle.

      Good advice. I would suggest the outcome will depend on if the outside project is related in any way to the job you do. If it can be argued that your knowledge required to complete the project was acquired as a result of your employment or a result of training your received at work then things may not be resolved in your favour.

  26. Here's a snippet from my employment agreement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "2.3 Assignment of Inventions. Subject to
    Section 2.5, I hereby assign and agree to assign in the
    future (when any such Inventions or Proprietary
    Rights are first reduced to practice or first fixed in a
    tangible medium, as applicable) to the Company all
    my right, title and interest in and to any and all
    Inventions (and all Proprietary Rights with respect
    thereto) whether or not patentable or registrable
    under copyright or similar statutes, made or
    conceived or reduced to practice or learned by me,
    either alone or jointly with others, during the period
    of my employment with the Company. Inventions
    assigned to the Company, or to a third party as
    directed by the Company pursuant to this Section 2,
    are hereinafter referred to as "Company
    Inventions."
    2.4 Obligation to Keep Company
    Informed. During the period of my employment and
    for six (6) months after termination of my
    employment with the Company, I will promptly
    disclose to the Company fully and in writing all
    Inventions authored, conceived or reduced to practice
    by me, either alone or jointly with others. In addition,
    I will promptly disclose to the Company all patent
    applications filed by me or on my behalf within a
    year after termination of employment. The Company
    will keep in confidence and will not use for any
    purpose or disclose to third parties without my
    consent any confidential information disclosed in
    writing to the Company pursuant to this Agreement
    relating to Inventions."

    Does this mean if I start developing iPhone apps or set up a blog in my spare time, that would be considered my employer's property?!

  27. A double edged sword. by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When the company has a blanket policy that takes the employee's inventions, it can come to bite them in the ass.

    When I was illegally fired by Microsystems, Inc. ("MSI") they took possession of work I did on my own time using my own tools. However, on the workers comp. claim their denial was based on the claim the tendinitis was caused in part by my work at home. Either MSI fraudulently denied the workers comp. claim, or committed fraud by asserting and taking possession of the work I did on my own time.

    By having a blanket policy of owning everything you do, the employer could be on the hook for everything you do.

    1. Re:A double edged sword. by NovaSupreme · · Score: 3

      Go on..
      What happened afterwards? Did you get MSI to accept its fault?

    2. Re:A double edged sword. by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The workers comp insurance company settled. Then MSI paid a rule 68 judgment of $125k + interest, which was for a lawsuit stemming from their illegal firing, violation of the Mass. version of the ADA, the FMLA, and retailiation.

    3. Re:A double edged sword. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My wife had a wonderful idea - make a porno and attribute it as company property. Since the company owns everything you do, whether related to your work or not, they can't say it isn't theirs. Then let everyone know about the porno they had you work on.

    4. Re:A double edged sword. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How did MSI take possession of work you did using your own tools? Did you store the artifacts of that work on their tools or something? Otherwise, how did they even know about it?

    5. Re:A double edged sword. by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 1

      I asked them if it did and if they wanted it, they said yes, so I provided it to them.

      Just because your employer is without ethics, does not mean that you should compromise yours.

    6. Re:A double edged sword. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do respect your position. Mine is that ethics is orthogonal to contract law. I would never draw first blood on my employer (or on anyone really).

  28. Off the clock? by koan · · Score: 1

    If you aren't using their resources or time I don't think that's legal, and if it is get a new job.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  29. GTFO ASAP by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

    This kind of work condition is absolutely unacceptable.

    1. Re:GTFO ASAP by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      But perfectly legal in many places.

    2. Re:GTFO ASAP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No kidding. It's absurd that anyone should have a claim to all things you do, even when away from work. Sounds like a monarch-serf relationship. The OP says s/he is happy working for them, so it doesn't sound like they want to leave. If they were foolish enough to submit to the circumstance, and don't want to leave, then I'd say they would have to pitch their idea to their masters, first, have them reject it, then pursue it on their own.
      But really - "I claim rights to all things you think"? Fuck off.

    3. Re:GTFO ASAP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Find something that you can legally produce which they cannot legally possess, and then insist that they take possession of it.

    4. Re:GTFO ASAP by MidGe · · Score: 1

      And Dickensian, at that!

  30. Please don't release anything as open source. by Pathwalker · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you don't actually own the rights to what you are writing, please don't contaminate open source projects by including code owned by your employer.

    Cleaning up a contaminated code base is a big pain. Please make sure you own the code, or have the rights to release it before setting it free.

    1. Re:Please don't release anything as open source. by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      And negotiating with people who try to relicense your code can be even worse. Look up the old OpenBSD/Linux/Broadcom driver issue. It's a fascinating thread, at http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/1558/focus=1558. And there was clearly a great deal going on behind the scenes with both thoughtful and easily irritated people trying to resolve things.

    2. Re:Please don't release anything as open source. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, shut up fuck-bag.

    3. Re:Please don't release anything as open source. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The last bit is actually the easiest. If it's released for free (Public Domain), then there are no Intellectual Property rights. That can be an easy way out for your boss (no IP rights = no formal need to get lawyers involved) and the FOSS project (Public Domain can be incorporated under all FOSS licenses). Obviously, this hinges on two things that you must check. 1, is your boss OK with this? In general, this won't be the case when your private work competes with your company. 2, can you actually release code in the Public Domain (legal question, depends on local law).

  31. Leave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't put up with that kind of bullshit, you should of laughed when you read that subservient crap and told them no before you started the job

    act like a peasant, get treated like one

  32. IAAL. by crankyspice · · Score: 1

    If you're in California, call me. :) Mention Slashdot and receive 50% off the initial consultation, normally priced at $0.00 (USD).

    --
    geek. lawyer.
    1. Re:IAAL. by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      Wait... so if you're a lawyer, then then your "IANAL" tee shirt actually means...
      o_O

  33. Oh Noes! by PPH · · Score: 2

    Not the media!

    "Found guilty by the New York Times, they vowed to appeal their case to the Wall Street Journal".

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  34. Renegotiate contract by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

    Renegotiate contract, talk to your company about your plans, quit... don't try to cheat your way around a contract you knowingly signed.

    I've been open about my private programming endevors with each employer I worked for, before I signed the contracts, and none have ever been a problem. They usually require you to sign a paper which states you can't use company-specific knowledge/IP/etc (which I find understandable), but otherwise I've never been limited to what I can do in my own spare time. Most employers are perfectly reasonable people too.

    Then again, the judicial system in my country (Netherlands) aren't particularly fond of "unbalanced" contracts such as EULA's, NDA's and non-competes. From what I know, US laws favor corporate interrests a lot more.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  35. Depends on the location by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

    It'll depend in part on how willing your employer is to negotiate those terms, and in part on what the law in your state is. For instance in California you have California Labor Code sections 2870-2872 governing IP agreements. That law trumps anything in the agreement. Since I live and work in CA, I make it a point to mark up any IP agreements with a note about those sections before signing it. You'll want to check the law in your state, depending on what it says you may have more leverage with your employer.

  36. Two choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Basically you have three choices:

    1. Suck it up. You signed the employment contract with the onerous terms. Live with it and try not to mourn your dreams too much.
    2.Renegotiate your employment contract. Get the modified terms in writing.
    3.Quit and start your own company. Maybe you'll be the next app store millionaire.

  37. Don't sign such a contract by nedlohs · · Score: 1

    Just strike out those bits before you sign it - chances are they don't actualy care enough about them to argue.

    Of course since you already have, either find out it is overridden by some applicable law or bad luck.

    Don't try and "trick" your way around - while chances are they won't care at all if you happen to luck into the next angy birds/minecraft/facebook/google you can bet those tricks won't hold up when the lawyers come.

    1. Re:Don't sign such a contract by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just strike out those bits before you sign it - chances are they don't actualy care enough about them to argue.

      What about the language at the bottom of the document saying the agreement is not modifiable except by agreement of the CEO or Board or somesuch?

    2. Re:Don't sign such a contract by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 1

      Irrelevant. Its a meeting of minds, meaning you can strike out / modify and sign, and if a duly authorised company representative signs it - tough shit for the company if they later think they shouldnt have.

    3. Re:Don't sign such a contract by mikechant · · Score: 1

      What about the language at the bottom of the document saying the agreement is not modifiable except by agreement of the CEO or Board or somesuch?

      Good point; make sure you strike out and initial this bit as well...

  38. Well, teach them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Burn a police station (or similar) to the ground - if cought state it was the employers idee and produce your contract. ;)

  39. Renegotiate your agreement. by subreality · · Score: 2

    I am very happy with my current job, but there have always been a few ideas for things I've wanted to develop on the side. Ideally I'd keep my day job

    Stop right there and put a period at the end. That's the opening of the letter you send to HR.

    The next part is, "But I'll quit if I have to."

    Then stop and consider real hard whether this is actually true before you sign your name to it.

    Then the ball's in their court. You'll either get canned in short order, or they'll sit down with you and negotiate a contract where you belong to them during business hours but you own your own soul afterward. Which result you get depends on what kind of company it is... Some really do think that owning your whole life like property is the proper order of the world and be offended at your sheer audacity of thinking otherwise. Perhaps if they're paying really well that will be worth it, but if that was the case, you wouldn't be here now, would you?

    I personally suggest you reneg even if you live in a state where such IP agreements are invalid. They can still sue you for the rights to your New Big Thing, and you will not have the time or money to fight it even if you'd theoretically win in the end. Get it in clear writing that you own your own time.

    1. Re:Renegotiate your agreement. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am very happy with my current job, but there have always been a few ideas for things I've wanted to develop on the side. Ideally I'd keep my day job

      Stop right there and put a period at the end. That's the opening of the letter you send to HR.

      You just told them in writing you have ideas while still working for them!! Company 1, you 0, hell -1 for being dumb. Try to think it through next time.

    2. Re:Renegotiate your agreement. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All negotiations are based on understanding both your, and their, positions.
      Corporations exist to Maximize profits.
      Lawyers are employed to help make this happen.

      If you are integral to the future success of the Co. and maybe a bit indispensable and have friends in high places, then you *may* have a position with which to negotiate new terms.

      If you fail any of these tests, don't go there.
      No person in a Legal/HR department will volunteer to give you rights for no good reason and which may cost them their job & future if you turned out Zuckurberg, for example. Hell I'd sack them myself if they did and worked for me.

      Success in life has very little to do with the law, it's about making things happen whilst avoiding the legal pitfalls.
      Develop the damn thing & when you are reasonably happy with what you have, find a good lawyer & explain that you are *thinking* of developing outside of your company & need advice.

        Never forget , the law is an ass, you simply have to avoid being behind it.

       

  40. Personal experience by AG+the+other · · Score: 1

    As a sometime composer and arranger I was faced with an overly broad IP policy at a previous employer.
    The way it was written they could have claimed just about anything that I did including recordings. I asked for a clarification of that clause in my contract and they admitted that it wasn't even legal in my state. It might be worth checking with a lawyer.

    --
    Non bene pro toto libertas venditur auro
  41. what happens to open source work? under laws by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    what happens to open source work? under laws like this I don't thing some places can say you did work on X open source projects and now we own the rights to the full IP of the project.

    1. Re:what happens to open source work? under laws by jholyhead · · Score: 1

      The company inherits IP that you generate. If they chose to fight it, they could demand the code is returned to them as it wasn't yours to donate to the OS project in the first place.

    2. Re:what happens to open source work? under laws by Pathwalker · · Score: 1

      This is why most projects require signed statements from new contributors stating that they either own the code they are contributing, or have permission from the code owner to contribute it.

      If someone lied, and submitted code owned by an employer without the employer's permission, it can be a real mess to resolve.

    3. Re:what happens to open source work? under laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They wouldn't get rights over code they (or their employee who contributed) did not write, so if the project has >= 1 other contributor, the project would not be wholly owned by them. That being said, the contributions from the employee in question would be owned by the company, and could be retroactively relicensed (because the employee never had the legal authority to release the code to begin with, so it's not really retroactively relicensing, it's more like choosing the original license after the fact) and the sections written/edited/changed by that employee would be dirty unless the company released the code under the same license the employee did or the code was rewritten.

      Copyright (at least in the US) really does need a better way of dealing with works from multiple authors.

      Disclaimer: IANAL.

    4. Re:what happens to open source work? under laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they just own full rights to the code that you illegally contributed to the open source projects, which now cannot be legally distributed until your tainted code is removed. Everyone downstream thanks you for contribution to creating a major PITA.

  42. Don't quit your job by Skapare · · Score: 1

    Don't quit your job ... just yet. And don't start your side project, yet, either.

    Do start the hunt for a new job. Investigate the laws of various states you would be willing to move to, to see what kind of negotiating power you might have with potential employers in those states. Only after you have acquired a new job should you resign from your old job.

    Whether to tell them this is the reason, or not, is up to you. They MAY want to counter offer. If they do, suggest to them that in addition to matching salary, you want them to replace their IP policy to one that protects employees rights to do things on their own, not on company time, not with company resources, unrelated to company interests as known to the employee, as belonging exclusively to the employee. Also ask for side projects that are related to the company interest to be shared between company and employee 50/50, and that if the company does not exploit the idea in 4 years (this being the test if it really has company interest), it reverts to exclusively owned by the employee.

    Or just move on to the better company. If your idea does relate to your previous employer, or is something they are interested in, or competes with them, they will likely have issues with this and could sue your IP infringement (e.g. you knew their technology, etc).

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
  43. IP should be declared null and void by cellocgw · · Score: 1

    IMHO, of course. There are NDAs and Proprietary Technology agreements that any company can require for specific projects or capabilities. It should end there. The thought that a corporation can own your thoughts, no matter how derivative, is just sad. Then again, so is the currrent state of copyright law. Not much way around IP (and copyright) law without a massive multi-target Pelican Brief operation :-(

    --
    https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
  44. Ask them if they also own your home made porn. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You might like to ask legal or HR that if all intellectual property you create whilst employed to them means that they own it whether or not "home made porn" also fits that category (consider that you would otherwise have the copyright over the video and thus it amounts to intellectual property.)

    Now if they do want to own that, inform them that you'll need to put the company logo on your home made porn before you upload it to youtube... well, not necessarily upload to youtube, but that ought to get them thinking about exactly how broad they want their reach to be. Rinse and repeat for writing an erotic story.

    At this point your employer should be saying that not every piece of intellectual property that you create is theirs. Thus you need for them to determine what exactly they do and do not claim ownership over.

    What's likely to be the case is that they'll want ownership of anything and everything related to their business. So if they hire you to work on Linux, then any work you do at home on Linux (be it their version or another), or on BSD or any other operating system would be owned by them. Similarly writing a piece of software that was related to what is already found (or a job performed) there would also be covered.

    I've been down this road and it may be that the only option for you is to find another job.

    What this really boils down to is that for people that are hobbyists, it can be a bit of a blow to work for some IT companies because it means you lose ownership of whatever it is you would normally do as a hobby. For those that live and eat work only or for whom programming is a work only thing, no problem is present.

    1. Re:Ask them if they also own your home made porn. by crutchy · · Score: 1

      home made porn can be profitable.
      regarding op, in australia we call them "foreigners" or "cashies"

  45. Re:You can't negotiate WRONG by The+Other+White+Meat · · Score: 1

    Sorry, but you are completely wrong. There is even a term for it:

            Renegotiating a Contract.

    You can speak with your employer about negotiating an exemption, or new terms entirely.
    They are by no means required to renegotiate, but if they do, the new contract replaces the old.

    You may want to hire an attorney to draft the modified agreement and/or be present at negotiations.

    In professional circles, this sort of thing happens all the time; no need for all the drama being suggested.

    --

    --- Generation X: The first generation to have SIG lines inferior to their parents... ---
  46. Almost certainly unenforceable by MSTCrow5429 · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you are working off the clock, and not using the employer's resources or facilities, I'm nearly certain this is void. If you're using the employer's resources or facilities, the employer likely has at least partial ownership. You may want to visit a law library and ask the law librarians how to search for materials relevant to your concern, or consult with an employment lawyer.

    --
    Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
    1. Re:Almost certainly unenforceable by pacergh · · Score: 4, Informative

      You're incorrect.

      These agreements are enforceable. There are limits, and things well beyond the work you do for the company may very well be excluded from the agreement, but how often is that the case?

      If you are a programmer, and work for a company as a programmer, and create a work on your own that involves programming, then it is related to the work you do for the company.

      Beware the advice you receive on Slashdot about this.

      If you think there is a chance you can make money off of a potential side project, protect yourself and your partners by hiring a tech startup lawyer.

      Otherwise you may be paying a lot more in legal fees down the road.

      And I am a lawyer, and this is an area in which I practice.

    2. Re:Almost certainly unenforceable by compro01 · · Score: 1

      Nope, perfectly legal in most states. Welcome to the land of the free to fuck employees.

      Such terms are prohibited in California, Utah, Washington, North Carolina, Kansas, Delaware, and Illinois.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    3. Re:Almost certainly unenforceable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're incorrect.

      If you are a programmer, and work for a company as a programmer, and create a work on your own that involves programming, then it is related to the work you do for the company.

      So a garbage truck driver can't drive his personal car to the store -- or it's related to his work?

      If I am a programmer for a telecomm, and outside work hours I decide to make a flying-Hamsters game... It has absolutely nothing to do with work I do for my company. As long as I do it in my off time, and I don't use their property (facilities, software).

      Even though the OP mistakenly "signed his life away", it does NOT follow that the two are related --

    4. Re:Almost certainly unenforceable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are a programmer, and work for a company as a programmer, and create a work on your own that involves programming, then it is related to the work you do for the company.

      Horse shit. That is an absurdly over-broad interpretation. Unconscionably so. And my lawyer would eat you for lunch, with your client for dessert.

    5. Re:Almost certainly unenforceable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I am a lawyer, and this is an area in which I practice.

      This all really depends on jurisdiction. Please don't generalize. You should known better.

    6. Re:Almost certainly unenforceable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Fuck you legal parasitic scum. Two former employers have attempted to usurp and/or block my work. One paid my scumbag lawyer his obscene fees and the other backed off and settled before I had to involve my law scum. One former employer was a Fortune 100 company.

      In California, it does not matter what they have you sign - if if the agreement violates state labor law, and they play tort games that harm your employment, they are toast.

    7. Re:Almost certainly unenforceable by hey! · · Score: 2

      I agree with you. That said, one thing that ought to be noted is that everyone is assuming this guy signed a contract; it doesn't say that in the summary. It just says:

      my employer has an IP policy that states that anything I do while under their employ is theirs, even when I'm off the clock.

      Stating that something is their policy doesn't necessarily make it so. They can't unilaterally impose something like that, although if you are working on a competing product in your spare time they wouldn't have to. You'd be in the soup in any case.

      If it's something really unrelated to work and it's non-commercial, I'd say the best bet is to ask your employer. Let's say your company does video encoding software and you want to set up your running club's website. What reasonable objection could they have to that? If they *do* object, then I definitely *would* look for different work, because I wouldn't trust anyone that greedy.

      I'd say in order of preference the courses of action are: (1) get permission; (2) see a lawyer; (3) don't do it.

      I wonder if the submitter's company is one of those ones that hires its employees as "consultants" to avoid paying taxes. If so this could get interesting.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    8. Re:Almost certainly unenforceable by strat · · Score: 1

      I know not everyone appreciates this sort of input, but +1 from a serial co-founder who's not a lawyer but knows when to use one.

    9. Re:Almost certainly unenforceable by crutchy · · Score: 1

      lawyers probably know a lot of things, but that doesn't preclude them from making a sales pitch

  47. Work with your company's legal team by rockmuelle · · Score: 1

    I work under a similar, very restrictive IP agreement. I raised the issue of side projects with the corporate lawyer in charge of IP and explained the types of projects I do on the side for fun and profit. While the company does not grant blanket exclusions, they were happy to review them on a project by project basis and grant exceptions.

    Their goal was to protect the company's business using standard legal tools. Just like my job requires me to use my skils to the fullest, so does theirs. However, talking through it made it clear that there was no malicious intent.

    One important thing to know when doing this: the lawyers represent the company and are ethically bound to put the company's interests first. They won't be able to give you any legal advice. You may want to talk to a lawyer first, just so you have outside counsel.

    Also, this is just business for the company. The more you treat as business (and not good vs evil), the better chance you'll have of success.

    -Chris

  48. Re:You can't negotiate WRONG by OzPeter · · Score: 1

    Sorry, but you are completely wrong.

    Disagree and you may think I am splitting hairs .. but renegotiating is crafting a new contract .. not negotiating terms on a contract that has been signed.

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  49. Re:You can't negotiate WRONG by OzPeter · · Score: 1

    Sorry, but you are completely wrong.

    And what I should have added was that if the company doesn't want to renegotiate the contract then the OP is SOL. It takes two to tango, but if one party doesn't want to then you have to suck it up. Its all about power. As one poster put it .. the people who write the contract have the power.

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  50. I am worried about this myself. by wbr1 · · Score: 1

    I just signed on with a company that has a blanket statement in the contract similar to this. IN fact they also asked to list any prior inventions so they could be exempted. I have several business ideas but these (to me at least) are not 'inventions' so how do I put a business idea on the document? They are not related even slightly to the company I am now hired by, but I do want to further research and possibly develop them in the next year or two. I took the job (and signed the contract) as it was, because I was nearly homeless for lack of employment and needed it asap. I was not in a great position to negotiate from for this and several other reasons. Now I feel trapped by it and hope it does not bite me if and when I decide to go off on my own. So, any intelligent discussion on this matter is welcome by more than just the original submitter!

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
    1. Re:I am worried about this myself. by jholyhead · · Score: 2

      Why the hell didn't you deal with this before signing it?

      Desperation is an excuse for signing if even if they wouldn't budge, but it isn't an excuse for not even trying to budge them in the first place. They offered you a contract - you were in the position of strength at that moment and you bottled it. Now you are under contract and are in a position of weakness relying on your employer's goodwill. Not a place you want to be.

      Talk to your boss first thing tomorrow. The longer you leave it, the harder it will be to change it.

    2. Re:I am worried about this myself. by wbr1 · · Score: 1

      Because. It is a work from home position, so one my boss cannot directly see what I do. Two, they are hiring like mad, but will drop you just as easy. I started in a training class of almost forty and in a week we are down to twenty for various reasons. I know if I slowed the process down in the slightest or tried to haggle in any way, they would just drop me and go get some other schmo.

      Hopefully, I will have a less encumbering position once I am ready to do anything with my idea anyway. Or even better, be able to quit and start my business full-time, but I don't see that as feasible as I do not have much in savings, and my main idea is likely to be a slow starter (but steady in a niche market).
      Hell, if it comes down to it, I will go mop the kitchen at the local bagel shop for $7-9/hr to cover my personal expenses once I have enough saved back up and the core of my service running.
      Right now, I am a single, geek, hermit, and can easily live in a hovel on top ramen as long as necessary.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
  51. Do you have kids? by owenferguson · · Score: 1

    If you have kids, just teach them what they need to know to start the business idea themselves. Also works with a trusted friend or sibling. Give the idea to someone who's not as encumbered by a poorly-negotiated contract.

    1. Re:Do you have kids? by jholyhead · · Score: 1

      That's fine if you have a kid who is also a partner in a corporate law firm.

      You think your employers wont chance their hand with a judge if you build something profitable? Could you afford to contest a suit if they did file?

    2. Re:Do you have kids? by pacergh · · Score: 1

      Exactly. And by teaching your kid/partner then you're still running the risk of the contract applying. Further, like the above commenter wrote, do you have the money to defend against a lawsuit?

      Consult an experience tech startup lawyer. Heck, you may even find one who has dealt with your company in the past and knows how to get a deal out of them.

      Doing nothing, however, is a bad idea. An even worse idea is relying on the advice from folks here instead of the advice of a competent lawyer.

  52. I have a 'creative' by NEDHead · · Score: 1

    wife/son/sibling

    1. Re:I have a 'creative' by jholyhead · · Score: 1

      unless one of them is also a lawyer, that's a strategy leading straight to bankruptcy.

  53. false identity is probably your best bet by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    That said, if you care at all about the morality of the matter you should avoid actually infringing on the technology of your employer.

    We've had a lot of betrayal lately. Lots of people stabbing each other in the back. Just make sure your coding isn't taking proprietary technology or ideas from your parent company.

    Whatever you think you're getting paid, if the customer wants that then you're probably more of a code smuggler then a coder. And you might be able to make a lot more money if you facilitated the transaction through your company rather then around it.

    People that bring business into a company are prized above all others. I don't care how smart you are or how hard you work. The "rainmakers" are always top dog. If you can bring a big contract into your company then the company will love you. If you can do it repeatedly they'll give you your own private island and yacht.

    Think big picture. Does the company have a product or service that is being undersold or that you know a new market to push it in? Try that. If you can make your company a lot of money then you might make a lot more money without having to work as hard.

    Betrayal is a toxic behavior that destroys civilization and industry. We are most successful when we work together. We can accomplish things together that we cannot accomplish alone. Betrayal makes all of that impossible. And with a little trust and mutual cooperation we can make everyone far richer and pro productive then we would have ever been otherwise.

    Now your company could betray you as well. If they're stupid then they might. Be careful about making it hard for them to back stab you if you actually have a good idea. But try to work through them if you can because the profits will be bigger if you can make the company itself wealthy in the process.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  54. right of first refusal? by Amigan · · Score: 1
    My employer also has such a policy. It even goes to covering things in business areas that they might get involved in.

    One thing I have learned is that while they have the right of first refusal, if they choose not to pursue the idea, I can ask to have it reassigned back to me and pursue on my own. That might be your only option, assuming what you're pursuing doesn't compete with your current employer.

    --
    "Software is the difference between hardware and reality"
  55. it's better to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and ask forgiveness later than to always ask permission and never get anything done. there are so many laws, that pretty much everything is illegal if you ask enough lawyers. If you have a truly great idea, just do it!

    1. Re:it's better to do by pacergh · · Score: 1

      This is not always the case. If you "do" and it takes off, then it may all be taken away from you.

      It is prudent to talk with an experienced startup lawyer—in this case, preferably an experience tech startup lawyer.

      Good lawyers tell you how to do move forward with the least risk of getting sued.

  56. depends by alienzed · · Score: 1

    If the work you want to do at home is based heavily on what you do at work, I can see your employer having a problem with it. If it's totally independant, get a lawyer, cover your ass and do what you will. I'm sure that it is illegal to retain ownership of something you invent while not being paid, but that implies that you aren't directly benefitting from your paid time to invent something when you aren't on the clock. For example, if you learn to build a Web 2.0 style website at work, and build a monetized web 2.0 website while at home, there's a problem there. But if you're an accountant and you build a website in your spare time, I would find it hard to believe that your company could claim any sort of ownership.

    --
    Never say never. Ah!! I did it again!
  57. you have two options by cas2000 · · Score: 1

    renegotiate your contract or quit.

    you should never have signed such an onerous agreement in the first place. I've never had any problems form employers when refusing to sign such contracts and always insist on them being rewritten so that anything done on my time on my equipment remains mine, and that any of my contributions to open source projects are licensed under the terms of that project.

    (sometimes it takes the lawyers a few attempts to get it right - i've found that even if the boss is willing, lawyers have difficulty understanding that their client actually wants the contract to be fair)

    on a related note, IMO if your employer wants to own everything you create on your own time then they should pay you for 24 hours/day, 7 days/week - prob. about 4 times your current pay (based on a working week of 40 hours).

    1. Re:you have two options by pla · · Score: 1

      you have two options
      renegotiate your contract or quit.


      Quitting sucks, plain and simple. Negotiating with HR/Legal generally reduces to either "suck it up" or quitting (possibly not by choice). So what does that leave? The really obvious third option that everyone in this discussion seems to have overlooked...

      "Policies" don't mean a bucket load of sheep guts in court unless your employer has an actual signed contract with you granting them the rights to your work on your own time - Without that, they have nothing but one more vague threat to get rid of you for conduct unbecoming a serf. And, in most US states, they can already toss you on the street at the drop of a hat, for no reason whatsoever or for any reason that doesn't violate federal anti-discrimination law. So threatening to get rid of you for one more reason than "nothing" amounts to just a few more squirts of piss in a barrel of raw sewage.

      So the easiest course of action, in the absence of an actual, legally-binding transfer of rights? Just don't tell them, simple as that. Obviously that limits you from doing any real marketing of your side projects, but your company can do exactly one thing about it if they find out - Threaten to fire you if you don't give them your firstborn, then do so when you wisely refuse. Which they already could have done any time they wanted, so, same outcome as every other worst-case scenario except with a rather low probability of it ever happening.


      Now, on the off chance you do actually have some formal contract spelling out the terms of your employment, you can still opt for "just don't tell them". It just comes with the extra condition that you need to do your side-work in an area they can't really "own" in any meaningful way - Network installations, fixing/upgrading little old ladies' computers, releasing your code anonymously into the PD, etc.

    2. Re:you have two options by cas2000 · · Score: 1

      the point that you are missing is that your legal rights "don't mean a bucket load of sheep guts" unless you can afford to defend them in court.....which is likely to cost an absolute minimum of $5000-$10000, with no guarantee of success.

      unless you can afford to lose that kind of money, you can't afford to sue anyone for any reason.

      and, BTW, your comments about requiring a signed contract are only true in *SOME* states in the U.S. The default assumption of who owns what varies from state to state. I'm not even an american citizen and even i know that.

      and, in any case, the OP already *has* a contract saying the employer owns everything they create whether on their own time or not. once again, the validity of such clauses varies from state to state. In some states, they're perfectly valid and enforcable. In other states, they're not.

    3. Re:you have two options by wrook · · Score: 1

      This is absolutely terrible advice. Firing you is *not* the worst they can do. That's the absolute *best* outcome that could happen. The worst they can do is fire you and then sue you. Do you know how much lawyers cost? Especially when you explain to them that your contract negotiation technique was to say, "I don't like the terms of my contract, so I'll just ignore them", they aren't going to go pro-bono.

      You could easily find yourself unemployed, with a piece of IP that you can't sell because there is an injunction against it, a lawsuit suing you for control of the IP and whatever damages (real or imagined), and a lawyer costing you a couple grand a week. And to top it all off, your lawsuit, being a matter of public record, will show up on any background search forcing you to explain to any potential employer how you didn't like your contract so just decided to ignore it. To say you would be radioactive is putting it mildly.

      Basically, you are putting yourself at the mercy of your employer's legal team. Even if they aren't vindictive (and some are), they might just see it as a revenue generating operation. "Hey employee 1234 is being a dick and we can make $10K out of it (and make ourselves seem useful to boot). Let's go for it!"

    4. Re:you have two options by pla · · Score: 1

      unless you can afford to lose that kind of money, you can't afford to sue anyone for any reason.

      The FP author wouldn't need to sue in this case - His employer would need to sue him, which a court would laugh back to the stone ages (okay, realistically, he'd end up paying a few hundred bucks for an hour of some shyster's work filing a motion to dismiss). It takes a lot less effort to enforce your rights when you get them by default.


      and, in any case, the OP already *has* a contract

      Where did you get that information? The FP says "my employer has an IP policy that states that anything I do while under their employ is theirs". No matter how sternly worded, a "policy" does not equal a contract, even in the handful of non-"at-will" employment states.

    5. Re:you have two options by pla · · Score: 1

      Especially when you explain to them that your contract negotiation technique was to say, "I don't like the terms of my contract, so I'll just ignore them"

      Did you, uh, y'know, notice that most of my post addresses the fact that most (FTE) software engineers in the US don't work under contract? As made all the more obvious by the counterpoint of my last paragraph that basically says "if you actually do have a contract, make sure you produce nothing they can actually take away"?

      No? Okay then. To summarize:

      If you don't have a contract giving up right-X, then the default laws applicable to right-X still apply, regardless of what MegaCorp's "all your base are belong to us" BS "policies" have to say about it.

  58. Stop being so happy with your current employer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop being so happy with them and start taking a hard look at how much they are taking advantage of you. They think they own every thought in your head. Even though what they are asserting in their contract is nearly impossible to enforce it is an indication that they really don't care about the individual employee.

    The way to deal with this is to start looking for another job post-haste and to make absolutely certain that the new employer doesn't have a clause in their contract such as this. Don't raise a stink, just vote with your feet and make certain that when you do leave that people understand why.

    This is the only proper way to deal with this kind of idiotic policy.

    GC

  59. Washington State law protects you if you live here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=49.44.140

    RCW 49.44.140

    Requiring assignment of employee's rights to inventions — Conditions.

    (1) A provision in an employment agreement which provides that an employee shall assign or offer to assign any of the employee's rights in an invention to the employer does not apply to an invention for which no equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information of the employer was used and which was developed entirely on the employee's own time, unless (a) the invention relates (i) directly to the business of the employer, or (ii) to the employer's actual or demonstrably anticipated research or development, or (b) the invention results from any work performed by the employee for the employer. Any provision which purports to apply to such an invention is to that extent against the public policy of this state and is to that extent void and unenforceable.

              (2) An employer shall not require a provision made void and unenforceable by subsection (1) of this section as a condition of employment or continuing employment.

              (3) If an employment agreement entered into after September 1, 1979, contains a provision requiring the employee to assign any of the employee's rights in any invention to the employer, the employer must also, at the time the agreement is made, provide a written notification to the employee that the agreement does not apply to an invention for which no equipment, supplies, facility, or trade secret information of the employer was used and which was developed entirely on the employee's own time, unless (a) the invention relates (i) directly to the business of the employer, or (ii) to the employer's actual or demonstrably anticipated research or development, or (b) the invention results from any work preformed [performed] by the employee for the employer.

  60. See a lawyer, ask if what you say is really true. by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

    It probably isn't. If it is, have the lawyer write up a set of modifications that would make the policy acceptable to you. Present it to your employer and if he won't agree to it, quit.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  61. Washington State law protects you if you live here by TwineLogic · · Score: 3, Informative

    Maybe your state has a similar law?

    From http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=49.44.140

    RCW 49.44.140

    Requiring assignment of employee's rights to inventions — Conditions.

    (1) A provision in an employment agreement which provides that an employee shall assign or offer to assign any of the employee's rights in an invention to the employer does not apply to an invention for which no equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information of the employer was used and which was developed entirely on the employee's own time, unless (a) the invention relates (i) directly to the business of the employer, or (ii) to the employer's actual or demonstrably anticipated research or development, or (b) the invention results from any work performed by the employee for the employer. Any provision which purports to apply to such an invention is to that extent against the public policy of this state and is to that extent void and unenforceable.

    (2) An employer shall not require a provision made void and unenforceable by subsection (1) of this section as a condition of employment or continuing employment.

    (3) If an employment agreement entered into after September 1, 1979, contains a provision requiring the employee to assign any of the employee's rights in any invention to the employer, the employer must also, at the time the agreement is made, provide a written notification to the employee that the agreement does not apply to an invention for which no equipment, supplies, facility, or trade secret information of the employer was used and which was developed entirely on the employee's own time, unless (a) the invention relates (i) directly to the business of the employer, or (ii) to the employer's actual or demonstrably anticipated research or development, or (b) the invention results from any work preformed [performed] by the employee for the employer.

  62. Contract signed sealed and delivered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A employed can claim your IP no matter when you work on it, but..First of all you should not have signed that contract, a contract symbolizes both parties agree. You can however renegotiate it (try to find a different set of rules you agree on, namely that it does not mention 'all') if your idea falls outside the practical scope of you work activities. The law makes that distinction at least in Holland, we apply law to reason and fairness, not to the 'letter' as in some countries. If you work in a motor company as an accountant and you invent a new type of engine at home, that IP would not be a candidate for confiscation. If you are one of the engine designers, then yes, because the inspiration for you design may have come from your work environment or a result of your experience in it.

    If you are smart you renegotiate the contract for other reasons, and try to get the explicit words out of it. Tell them it doesn't protect them optimally to make their own rules.

  63. Would it be fun to. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you can't get out of the contract.
    Just make a note of the time taken to create the project/idea.
    Cost to you in parts and labour (if applicable)
    And bill them for the above at overtime rates.

    Well if they want the IP they gotta pay for it.

  64. Just Ask by phasmal · · Score: 1

    I previously worked for an employer with a similar policy. When I left I asked and received permission to 'own' some ideas I'd been working on on the side. They weren't actually interested in owning *everything* I worked on, only things that were relevant for their business. I think the broad employee agreement was more about not wanting to put any effort into crafting a good one, rather than about greedily taking everything.

    If I were you I would just talk to the company and see what they say first. Make sure you ask for confirmation of anything in writing - people often don't get serious about answering a question until you ask them to sign off on it.

    [obligatory disclaimer]
    Of course IANAL, so if you're really serious, consult one :)

  65. Their policy is BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless it is directly associated with your work duties they don't own it.
    This is especially true if you invent the next pocket fisherman and you work for
    an IT company. Tell them to bugger off.

  66. Every legal Ask Slashdot story ever by tepples · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Oh no, not another "ask a lawyer" question.

    Let me rephrase every legal "Ask Slashdot" story ever: "What have your lawyers (in a sampling of states) told you, and what should I expect on the way into the initial consultation?"

  67. Check in with the legal dept by billcopc · · Score: 1

    In the few places where such a policy applied, I had to run things by the legal team. In most cases, they just wanted to ensure I wasn't abusing insider info, or associating their brand with mine, and once their concerns were addressed, I was free and clear. There was one job where they threatened to sue me and appropriate my IP if I dared invent something cool, that had nothing to do with their line of business. So, I did it anyway and put it in my partner's name, and when the company started getting too nosy, I went on "stress leave" and found a better gig elsewhere. Well, okay, I really was stressed out and depressed from that shitty job, but I did it out of spite.

    This isn't fucking China. Your employer does not own you. If you are truly concerned, seek (outside) legal counsel to find out if your employer's policy is enforceable, in many jurisdictions there are laws against this sort of thing. If you are a creative guy like me, you will want to be more mindful of these overreaching clauses in your future employment contracts.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
    1. Re:Check in with the legal dept by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      I do wonder do people not read there contracts and remove this bits? I've not taken the default contract since my 2nd job in the industry and never not gotten the job because of it.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    2. Re:Check in with the legal dept by billcopc · · Score: 1

      Of course they don't, they're too eager to get a job, because they think it's a gift from heaven. I think that's a big part of the employment problem in North America. People need to stop thinking of jobs as some benevolent act by the rich, and start thinking in terms of offering their services to the company.

      "You want to get X done ? I am an expert on X. Here are my terms, do we have a deal ?"

      That works fine for skill-based careers where great employees are what makes the company tick. Probably not so much for the Wal-Mart greeters, but that's why the dumb have unions.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    3. Re:Check in with the legal dept by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      Does the greeter at walmart have any leverage? Unions are there to protect the people that have been there the longest. They serve little function beyond that.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
  68. 5.8 times minimum wage by tepples · · Score: 1

    Do you pay your employees for 24 hours/day?

    If the hourly rate is at least 5.8 times minimum wage: Yes. That covers 40 hours at the office plus time and a half for the other 128 hours of the week.

    1. Re:5.8 times minimum wage by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 2

      If your hourly rate is above 5.4 times the minimum wage as a computer worker ($27.63/hr), your employer may forgo paying you overtime.

      --
      Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
    2. Re:5.8 times minimum wage by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      No. They went into negotiations telling me that my salary was covering the 40 hours a week I'm in the office. If they had tried to get that to cover the other 128 hours as well, they would have to up the amount astronomically.

  69. Side projects of employer products by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

    There's an enormous difference in a business sense between your pursuing a hobby, supporting a work related open source project, and running a side market the company has not yet taken on and using your work time, work resources, or consultation with other company engineers to enhance this project. I've seen far too many junior engineers and excited new managers do precisely this and try to steal everythiung they could in the process, ignoring the existing law and creating intense personnel problems as they tried to hire away their former colleagues, only to bankrupt them with yet another ill-conceived startup. We saw a _lot_ of that in the dotcom era.

    Discuss the project first with your manager or the people who work directly with it. Especially with open source, it's usually easy to get a clause added to your IP agreement to allow you to support the project in your own time, or even to get permission to publish your patches. In fact, it can be _required_ if the software is GPL and you publish binaries to your clients or partners, and that's actually a powerful reason to use GPL licensed tools rather than Apache or BSD licensed tools. It protects the programmers from pursuing "ratholes" of customized forks without being able to merge back to the primary code line. I frequently review partner agreements and make sure that our legal department adds appropriate licensing contingencies for projects based on open source software so we can get any useful patches pushed upstream into the code base.

  70. Acceptance by tepples · · Score: 1

    renegotiating is crafting a new contract

    And continuing to employ someone after two weeks have passed since the offer of a new contract is acceptance of said new contract, if AC's comment is to be believed.

    1. Re:Acceptance by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      I would not risk anything like that, at least not without consulting an attorney who specializes in contract and labor law.

  71. Be a Contractor? Cross-Out IP contract terms? etc. by ivi · · Score: 1

    There may be different laws/policies that apply when employed vs contracting.

    Suppose you could write an agreement for a nearly identical arrangement,
    where you'd do what you do now, as a sub-contractor. Include (or paste-in)
    all the bits of your contract (that are NOT inconsistent with) you doing your
    off-time projects, while keeping the IP rights to it.

    Add all the bits that define an agreement of Contractor & Consultant, rather
    than employee. (Get a lawyer to draw it up, if the company won't. Maybe
    there are standard forms for this? IANAL, myself.)

    Of course, it takes 2 to Tango... so, this leaves your employer in the role of
    "Deal Breaker" ie, if they want to risk losing your services, if you don't get
    what you want.

    Now, in fairness, it might be said that you're "only" able to get as least some
    of these great product/project ideas -because- you're working in the context
    you call "workplace"... and your employer could then be said to be contribu-
    ting to -even- your after-hours projects.

    If they don't want to give you 100% ownership of your work, maybe offer
    up to 49%, so you both recognise their contribution, but -retain- controlling
    interest in your creations, which they did -not- pay for.

    Alternatively, let them pay you for any work they want to own 100%, or sign
    -only- agreements that let you do what you wish with -your- AH creations,
    but they get it "free" (as part of your normal earnings).

    There are lots of solutions, but - if you can't -both- sign up to one of them
    that you can live with - quit.

    Maybe form or join a group of similarly aggrieved creative techies & offer
    the benefit of your talents as a consulting company, and write your -own-
    agreements.

    Don't just sit there & feel you're being forced-into something that adverse-
    ly affects your total lifetime earnings.

    When -next- you're asked to sign a contract with untenable IP terms, like the
    one you've referred to here, just cross out the offending line(s), & hand it
    back, signed.

    IF they fail to check the line(s) on IP, it's not really important to them... so,
    no issue arises.

    IF they call you on it, simply point out that you've made that change, so
    you may find that you have -no- IP case to answer... :-)

  72. Move to Prague by slashdyke · · Score: 1

    I seem to remember from when I lived in Prague, anything that you develop stays yours. Even when developed on business time, the business cannot take ownership of it. That seemed to be very sensible to me at the time. Now, I may not remember it accurately, but I can always dream... :)

  73. Marketing department by tepples · · Score: 1

    After all, they were paying me to engineer and implement systems, not write lyrics or short stories.

    Unless they're looking for a liaison between the engineering and marketing departments. If you can write short stories, you can learn to write ad copy. If you can write lyrics, you can learn to write jingles.

    1. Re:Marketing department by Salgak1 · · Score: 1

      After all, they were paying me to engineer and implement systems, not write lyrics or short stories.

      Unless they're looking for a liaison between the engineering and marketing departments. If you can write short stories, you can learn to write ad copy. If you can write lyrics, you can learn to write jingles.

      And if they wanted me to add those skills to my job description, I would. For an additional price, of course (which may or may not be in dollars...)

  74. Can't be proved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless your company can prove that your side project derives from concepts or projects developed or being developed in said company, I would imagine that you have little to worry about.
    It would be nigh impossible to prove that your ideas were developed during your employment in the company. Unless of course you tell them...

    1. Re:Can't be proved by pacergh · · Score: 2

      This is not true. This kind of thing gets proven all the time. Think of all the time stamps on files. When things may be uploaded to something like Github. Or email messages to folks discussing the project.

      Lawyers know how to prove this. To presume it's impossible is to invite a dangerous outcome.

  75. Contract Law is misunderstood by the public by CuteSteveJobs · · Score: 4, Informative

    Mod parent up. Contract Law is contrary to what many people think it is, and I mean that in a good way. It tries to be very fair.

    The general public think if it's written down in a contract, and you signed it, you're bound by it. That's wrong. Aside from the very relevant link the parent posted, if you walk away from a contract the other party is only entitled to actual economic damages. So long as your new product isn't competing with your old employer and you haven't taken any of their IP (it's a felony to steal IP), then they haven't lost any money and aren't entitled to a cent in damages.

    1. Re:Contract Law is misunderstood by the public by julesh · · Score: 1

      Aside from the very relevant link the parent posted, if you walk away from a contract the other party is only entitled to actual economic damages. So long as your new product isn't competing with your old employer and you haven't taken any of their IP (it's a felony to steal IP), then they haven't lost any money and aren't entitled to a cent in damages.

      Not entirely true -- they could demand an order of specific performance to have your IP transferred to them.

    2. Re:Contract Law is misunderstood by the public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That may be why they add in the contract that if you are found in breach for any reason, the damages to the company are incalculable ?

    3. Re:Contract Law is misunderstood by the public by CuteSteveJobs · · Score: 1

      > Not entirely true -- they could demand an order of specific performance to have your IP transferred to them.

      Do you know of any cases where this has actually happened for an idea the employee has developed in good faith (without using their former employer's time, equipment, IP or premises)?

      Also these non-compete clauses are slipped into employment contracts as take-it-or-leave-it. See parent link: The courts are supposed to take a dim view of these. When the employee signs, it's from an unequal position and they don't know what they're getting into.

      Anon wrote
      > That may be why they add in the contract that if you are found in breach for any reason, the damages to the company are incalculable ?


      To trigger specific performance? Even if the contract says that doesn't mean the courts would blindly follow it. If you stick in a clause that says 'If you break this contract you agree to pay us $xK ' the courts will strike it too because those are not actual losses.

  76. Is it a work for hire or assignment? by pacergh · · Score: 1

    If the agreement you signed with your company only references works for hire, then it is possible that it may not apply to you. Work for hire does not apply to copyrights in software code. If the agreement is ambiguous, then it still may not apply. Software code would need to be assigned to your employer, and that can only be done in writing signed by you.

    Talk with a lawyer specializing in tech startups. Make sure you collect your employee's manual and any contracts your signed before working with the company. A lawyer specializing in tech startups should be able to walk you through this minefield.

    It's about more than just copyright. It's also about non-compete agreements (valid in some states, invalid in others), non-disclosure agreements, and other employment agreements which might restrict what you can do if you leave the company. And let's not forget patents as well.

    When I have clients in these situations I try to find ways to negotiate with their employer for a carve out for specific types of work, or I advise my clients to leave their current job. In the end, these are the only two options you have to ensure you protect your legal right to the work you create. Even then, however, you have to look at restrictive covenants—non-competes, non-disclosures, etc.

    Search the web or ask around for a tech startup lawyer near you.

  77. Re:Washington State law protects you if you live h by wmelnick · · Score: 1

    That is a great suggestion - play armchair lawyer. Then when the company sues you and claims that the code does fall under one of the parts,you find yourself on the receiving end of a lawsuit and have to hire a lawyer.

    Discuss this with your employer ahead of time. If the employer does not give you an exception, either find a new job or expect to fight a lawsuit and but several thousand dollars aside for legal expenses.

  78. Been there, done that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been down this road a couple of times.

    The reality is the agreement that you had to sign is unenforceable and most likely contrary to your local laws. That said ignore everyone who says to talk to legal or your boss, or anything like that. Some years ago I took a job at a large engineering company and explicitly asked about these types of IP policies, for the same reasons your are. The head of HR, to whom I asked the question, responded as I just said, those agreements are unenforceable so we don't use them. However, a couple of people that I worked with were doing a sideline project. One of them lost their nerve and asked the company about it. Even though they were entirely within their employment agreement and company policy, the company shut them down.

    Here are a couple of things that you must do in order to stay in the clear.
    1. Do not work on your project on company time or with company resources. That includes network access, software, company laptop at home etc. I don't even access personal email from a company computer.
    2. Tell no one at work about your side projects. Unless that person would be employee number 2 if you hit it, no one at work should know anything.
    3. Do not work on a product that competes with the company, enhances a company product, or is in a market that is foreseeable for the company to go into.

    If you violate number 1 give the company a legal claim on your work. If you violate number 3 you give the company a potential claim on your work. Number 2, well that is just avoiding issues, firing, threats, etc.

    If you are still worried about it then my advice is this. The IP agreement is between you and your employer. In my state it costs $150.00 to start a company. So start a company. Your company and you have an agreement on IP, you "work" for your company using your company's time and resources. As long as you follow a few simple rules for self employment your company's structure protects you from any liability and IP claim from your current employer.

  79. Do you program because it's your passion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If programming is your passion, like it is for me, than chances is that programming is you major hobby and most of your fulfilment comes from writing software either for your own education and for the common good. Your employer is saying that you have to ditch your hobby, since for example contributing to open source programs or writing shareware is a no go.
    So that leaves you with these possibilities:
    1) Some states have laws on the book that state that employers cannot get the rights for works created off the clock unless they're part of a project of the employer (or similar provisions). Check, and if you find one notify your legal department, because depending on your jurisdiction you may get in legal trouble if you continue like it is knowing full well that part of the contract (that the other party thinks holds) doesn't apply. Words like fraud come to mind.
    2) Renegotiate the contract.
    3) Look for a different job.
    4) Deal with never programming for fun again. Take on painting, dancing, or whatever.

  80. Bring in your porn fetish "hobbies" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And explain that you're merely following what's in the policy. It may help to keep a vibrating fist on your desk.

  81. Contracts of adhesion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Read about them.

    Also re: slavery laws. I'm pretty sure they were repealed a few years ago even in the USA...

    1. Re:Contracts of adhesion by The+Rizz · · Score: 1

      Did you even read my post?

  82. Don't sign by choke · · Score: 1

    My only advice is to read everything you're given, and don't sign agreements that are not beneficial to you.

    Abide by the contracts you have, and speak to an attorney to figure out how well it would stand up in court.

    --
    "No good deed goes unpunished"
  83. Bill them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Start billing them for all those hours. See how long that lasts before they decide to renegotiate.

  84. Everywhere the same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the same whether you work in industry, government, or academia. In industry they just put it very clear in writing when you get the job. Anyway, unless you own a business on the side when they hire you and they accept they you keep it, there is no way you, alone, can beat their lawyers in a court room.

  85. Use the name "Student" by Deadstick · · Score: 1

    ...like William Sealy Gosset did.

  86. Maybe not so restrictive? by geezer+nerd · · Score: 2

    The OP's assessment of "Overly-Restrictive" seems rather naive. During my entire career, just about every job I held had such provisions about intellectual property rights. I would not call it "overly-restrictive" at all. And that said, I found it usually possible to get some "wiggle-room" by up-front telling them exceptions that I wanted to preserve my sole rights in. Renegotiate, though it is harder to do once you are onboard.

  87. Do they pay you 24/7? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do they pay you 24/7? Otherwise their piece of paper isn't enforceable.

  88. Experience with that. by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 1

    Yup, I know where you're coming from, I worked for a (UK) bookshop company which included a similar clause along the lines of "any invention or program you come up with while an employee belongs to us if it is related to the business, whether or not you do it on company time."

    Now this is a company I liked, I got on well with the bosses. I was developing a POS/stock control system for use at temporary bookshops, and if it ended up being as cool as I wanted it to be I wanted to open source the thing. So I went and had a chat. They did have a point when they pointed out that I'd be helping the competition if I did that, and I countered with the idea of then charging the competition for support and updates. The conversation went back and forth for a bit.

    Then I asked if they would be happy to take responsibility for me writing a (hypothetical!) virus which attacked Amazon's systems.

    The clause was changed rather quickly.

    --
    Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    1. Re:Experience with that. by julesh · · Score: 1

      Yup, I know where you're coming from, I worked for a (UK) bookshop company which included a similar clause along the lines of "any invention or program you come up with while an employee belongs to us if it is related to the business, whether or not you do it on company time." [...] The clause was changed rather quickly.

      The clause was changed because it was unenforceable. See: http://www.dyoung.com/article-ownership (especially the last paragraph).

    2. Re:Experience with that. by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 1

      It might have been unenforceable, but I happen to think my argument resulted in a quicker resolution. Didn't require lawyers either, always a bonus in my book.

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
  89. I always stroked out and initialed those clauses by msobkow · · Score: 2

    I always stroked out those "all your code are belong to us" clauses and signed beside the cross-out before handing over employment contracts. When the person doing the hiring would question it, I'd explain that I had MSS Code Factory under development, show them the project, and make it clear that they did NOT own something I'd worked on since the late '80s to early '90s.

    I never had a single employer complain about me doing that.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  90. Think about who writes these policies... by echusarcana · · Score: 1

    Companies often have over-restrictive policies made by lawyers and HR people who have very little involvement with the realities of company operations. They tend to be external hired guns or corporate climbers. They are more about looking good then actually suing you. Aside from your personal work, this might prohibit:
    1) exchange of technology or knowledge with peers in your industry: thereby putting your company at a disadvantage
    2) honoring open-source license terms
    3) working with local universities or other institutions that require exchange of knowledge

    These can be a problem in many businesses. For example, it is very common for best practices to be shared among businesses in different jurisdictions. Because the authors of these IP policies aren't really the star performers in your company they really don't care how much paperwork this causes you. They don't do much work themselves, so they don't care.
    However, because these folks also tend to be too lazy and disconnected from real work to pursue you in a lawsuit so long as you keep a low profile. It is just too much effort.

  91. Renegotiate your contract by aklinux · · Score: 2

    Loopholes are only theoretical, even when vetted by an attorney or suggested by Slashdot readers ;).

    Falsifying your projects to keep your employer from finding out is rarely worth the risk. Once the employer does find out, you're liable to find that you've left yourself open to charges of fraud. You won't even be able to claim the fraud was innocent as you were working under an alias or behind a "straw man" just to keep your employer from finding out. You could find yourself owing your employer money for damages and the state some time in the Graybar Motel.

    Either renegotiate or find another job or ... Have confidence in yourself and go out on your own.

  92. Previous Ask Slashdot about a similar topic by cvnautilus · · Score: 1
  93. quit and reapply, or ignore it by bzipitidoo · · Score: 1

    I wonder if that might be a workable way forward. Companies are always changing their employment contracts anyway. Might make for a cleaner break, rather than attempting to change an existing contract. Quit and take a week or two of unpaid vacation, then hire back on, making sure to cross out all the objectionable requirements in the new contract. This is only if there is a mutual liking and respect, and this is seen as the most convenient way to address the IP concerns. And if there's not much to be lost on the years of service angle.

    In any case, contracts can have quite a bit of bluff and bluster. They ask for things they should not ask for, and that cannot be enforced in court. If you never question or fight it, if you believe in it and meekly hand over everything, they could score a huge steal at your expense. You may be able to ignore those terms. Go ahead with your private projects, keeping them apart from the employer, and put the onus on them to sue. If they even notice the extracurricular work, they may very well realize that part of their contract is garbage and that they can't win a suit, and will have the sense not to try it. Even if they try it, win or lose they may alienate the best of their other workers. Could cost them more than a victory is worth.

    --
    Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
  94. Strike it out when you sign it. by Lumpy · · Score: 2

    That is what I did I took my pen and drew a line through that clause noting that I did not agree with it and initialed the spot. Then signed the contract.

    I never signed an employment contract that I did not modify.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Strike it out when you sign it. by kilo_foxtrot84 · · Score: 1

      That's fine for paper contracts... but what do you do when your hiring paperwork is all electronic, including the signatures? This is increasingly common at some large corporations. Print, edit, submit?

  95. Re:You can't negotiate WRONG by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

    if the company doesn't want to renegotiate the contract then the OP is free to go to another job.

    There, FIFY.

  96. Red line the document and send it back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I was working for MCI and they sold us to Cable and Wireless USA (no longer operating, that should tell you something). C&W put out an IP policy that gave them ownership of anything I created while working for them, even on my own time. It even went further giving them ownership of anything I had previously created. It was a land grab, and probably unenforceable, but I wouldn't sign it.

    My boss kept pestering me to sign it, as it was now a condition of my employment. As a published author I had already sold the copyright to my written works.

    So I did something I thought was slick. I red lined the document. Any section I didn't like I struck thru with a pen, then I initialed the sections. I carved up the multi page document and then signed it. I wrote at the bottom that failure for corporate legal to respond within 30 days constituted acceptance of my changes.

    I made a copy and sent it off to corporate legal via inter office mail.

    I never heard from legal for the rest of my employment with C&W.

    I have done the same thing at every single employer that I have worked for in the 15 years since. I have never had a legal department reply. I have never had anyone harass me about not signing the form. As I understand it, from negotiating contracts for my writing, what I'm doing is legal.

    Good luck, and please run anything you plan to do past an IP lawyer for a real answer.

  97. Too late, unless you walk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not a lawyer, blah, blah.

    It's too late, unless you walk. They have a signed contract, and possibly it even says that by working there you continue to agree to any employee handbook changes they make.

    What you need to do is give notice and quit. If you're really valuable to your employer, they'll agree to rip up the contract and renegotiate.

    If you're not willing to quit, it must not be that important. If they won't renegotiate, you must not be that important to them.

    Point is, you are in no position to negotiate.

    I've negotiated these, prior to hire. But it is effectively the same gamble: I was willing to risk my employment with them and they had to see me as more valuable than anything I might invent on my own time.

  98. haven't read much of your thread, but fav topic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As far back as common law (the unsung basis for the constitution of the United States of America)... any contract signed under 'duress' is null and void. I usually ask "what would happen if I didn't sign this..." and usually get back the answer "Just sing it.". This works as 'duress' for me. However there is precedent for folks who have reason to believe that they are under duress.
    Some lines of reasoning go: "... but we already made and agreement (I would work, they would pay me) and then I was told to sign all these documents after I had moved here...". Works better if you sold house, even better if children are involved.
    Know your rights, in the U.S.A. the law works for you, not the other way around (unless you're just 'stupid-guilty' and say 'stupid-guilty' things, because you don't know the law.
    Also, check yer local 'bar' assoc. Plead that you a) have no money b) need advice c) believe you are in trouble... my experience(s) have (all) been good.
    Good luck!

  99. Simply develop with GPL code... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Simply develop with GPL code... The employer may own the code, but because GPL takes precedence it would FORCE your code to be GPL in the same way as if your employer had paid you to develop that code.

    Just make sure your 'get rich' plan works with GPL code and that nothing is patentable.

  100. Ask them what they actually mean... by mhkohne · · Score: 1

    Some places (and I've worked at one) had policies that could be read as them owning anything I did while employed, but could also be read as just applying to things in their area of interest (video test equipment, as it happened). I talked to my boss about it when I came on and he assured me that in fact it was only intended to read as applying to things that were related in some way to their business - stuff that was totally unrelated they didn't care about.

    Now that was verbal, not written, but I suggest that you start by asking the question, and see what they say.

    --
    A thousand pounds of wood moving at 300 feet per minute. Don't get in the way.
  101. I've turned down many jobs BECAUSE of this by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

    I have my own very small company and business. it has nothing to do with what I do during my 'day job' other than its software based.

    yet, even though the disciplines are very different, the bay area employers (my locale) think they have a right to ANY business you engage in while 'on fulltime salary'.

    ie, if you sell houses on the weekend, they think they have a right to say no or get a cut. if you fix computers (somewhat typical of software guys) they can try to interfere or tell you to stop.

    this ownership bullshit has got to stop! companies are WAY out of control in the power they have.

    WE NEED UNIONS. I know they are an evil, but the evil we have now is likely worse than it would be had we be unionized.

    software will never unionize, though. our grandparents would have a fit if they saw all the backward 'progress'; progress that they fought and suffered (literally) for, so that our lives would be better.

    all I know is: my grandfather worked for over 35 years at the same place and had a retirement. he never worked overtime unless he was paid (handsomely for it). his life was arguably better than mine, being forced to work 60+ hours a week for BASE PAY.

    we need unions. I just wish our selfish co-workers would band together and realize its for everyone's benefit. but we are too selfish to think of a community good. I really believe that and so I have no faith that our lot in life will improve.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    1. Re:I've turned down many jobs BECAUSE of this by Dragoness+Eclectic · · Score: 1

      ...

      If by "Bay Area" you mean San Francisco, CA area, you should know that California law forbids such contract clauses. So, they are unenforceable and you can tell your employer to go blow himself.

      --
      ---dragoness
  102. Market's good by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 2

    Sorry to hear that, but when your job starts controlling what you do with your spare time, its no longer a good fit.

    So the market is good, I had 3 calls on Friday alone, so its time to start looking and find something that's a good fit.

    And remember, during the interview process, you already have a job and you're also interviewing them.

    --
    If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
  103. Keep it to yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Work only on your on time, on your own computer (not networked in any way to the company's), do not use company software, compilers, debuggers nor any thing brought and paid for by the company. Wait 6~12 months after you leave the company to release or patent your work. Or have a trusted person who is qualified and outside the company apply for the patents or release the work.

  104. Done your wife recently? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "anything I do while under their employ is theirs, even when I'm off the clock" Marrried? I hope you haven't 'done' your wife, otherwise she's now your bosses wife. Had any children while working for them? Not your children any more (in which case they should be paying you child support or 24 x7 babysitting).

  105. Get a letter from legal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    My father used to work at a major Silicon valley technology company as an engineer, and wanted to pursue a project the company wasn't interested in. He asked his manager if he could do so on his own time and with his own resources. He obtained a letter from the legal department acknowledging that the IP would belong to him, and eventually built a business around this project. He still has that letter in a safe deposit box.

  106. Two choices by dskoll · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You have two choices:

    1. Talk to your employer and try to get an exemption written into your contract. If choice 1 fails, then you are left with:

    2. Quit.

  107. Get lean. Real lean. by metrometro · · Score: 1

    The most important you can do in an early venture is to validate your assumptions. What's the market fit? What's the minimum viable product? Who are the competitors? What can you learn from them? Who else is working on this that would partner/assist/guide you? All this stuff takes time and effort.

    Conveniently, none of this creates IP.

  108. Unlikely to check by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    May be fine if you have lots of experience and they have specifically saught you out...

    Actually what I typically do when faced with legal documents with clauses I disagree with is cross out or change the terms. Amazingly nobody ever actually looks at what you signed - they just look for the signature, see it and then assume you agreed to everything in the boilerplate. Part of what I like about this tactic is that it turns the implicit assumption that we should just accept whatever conditions we are presented with back against the company making that assumption.

  109. Cross that section out by jordan314 · · Score: 1

    I don't know if this is legit, but when I was hired and saw that clause, I simply crossed it out before signing it. It seemed ridiculous to me that they would own an iPhone app I wrote on the weekend that had nothing to do with the company. HR was ok with me crossing it out.

    1. Re:Cross that section out by David+Gerard · · Score: 2

      Cross out and initial.

      In a case of such a clause being ambiguous, I got a letter from HR clarifying that what I did off company time and equipment was mine mine mine.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
  110. Alcatel vs Evan Brown by sacrabos · · Score: 2

    Be careful. A zealous employer could ruin your life for you just having an idea while in their employ.

  111. Just pretty much ignore it, but do not let them bu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I ran into this same situation. I joined a company, moving my family 2000 miles in the process. This agreement was in the employment package. I removed it, round filed it and signed and returned the other stuff. 3 months after I joined the company HR slapped another one of these agreements on my desk and told me to sign it. I said no and round-filed it.

    A few weeks later they came back and told me I had to sign it or else, that it was a condition of my employment. Again, I round filed it, refusing to sign it.

    The next time it came up, my boss called ma aside and told me that HR was on his case, and that I had to sign it or he had to fire me. I told him that first of all the agreement was illegal. (What do I know, I am not a lawyer, but I took this position, and acted as if I knew what I was talking about) Second I had relocated my family at great expense (true) and that the required agreement had never been mentioned when I agreed to move (true). I said I had consulted with a lawyer who was eager to take my case if they fired me, and had guaranteed I would not only win, but probably own half the company. That was not strictly true, I was bluffing. I told my boss that I was not anxious for a confrontation over it but on the advice of my lawyer I should refuse to sign it, and if they fired me or in any way harassed me for refusing to sign it I could and would sue.

    I took and maintained the position that the required agreement was illegal and I was, under advice of a lawyer, under no requirement to sign it.

    I never heard any more on it. I worked there 12+ years and was promoted several times. Never did sign the agreement.

    However, If you follow this path, I suggest you do be prepared to find another job, just in case. Your employer may not be as inept as mine.

  112. I just asked and they said OK. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wanted to do some creative work that had no real overlap with what we were doing at the company. Had signed a similar agreement. Emailed my boss. He sent it up the food chain. Got an email back that said that given the scope of what I had proposed, they had no interest in the IP and I could retain the rights.

    Now, I suppose if I were stepping on their toes - creating something which they could use or which would compete with them - they'd be upset and probably wouldn't have said "yes". But some employers are surprisingly reasonable. Some aren't going to budge. Find out which kind yours is before you do anything rash.

  113. I've actually seen an employer... by doug141 · · Score: 1

    give an employee a written exemption for his non-job related invention, which he patented. Good employee, good employer, non-work related.

  114. Do it the way the big boys do... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Have your wife create a corporation.

    Or, do what musicians do under similar circumstances: work under an assumed name.

    Ask yourself: would the corporation that put you in this box hesitate to stretch the truth for their own benefit? You are under no moral obligation not to do what you don't think is wrong.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  115. there are a lot of ifs. .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are a lot of things to consider-
    for one, are you exempt? Would yoube using your own equipment? Would your software be related to your job? And what state do you live in? I would love to say more but I could get myself in trouble. I can say one thing though and that is that if they Sue you for working on a project after hours with your own equipment that doesn't implement methods developed during employment hours they would be very stupid as most past rulings have outlined very strongly that you must be "on the clock" and/or using company materials in order for them to claim IP on products by employees, so they would only raise employees tensions and waste money if they filed suit.... but it wouldn't hurt to ask first.

  116. Create something that violates a bunch of patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just create something that violates a bunch patents or does Pr0n seach and be sure to credit their ownership ;-)

  117. Bill them for weekends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Start billing them overtime for weekends when you do hobby projects.
    That should bring them into a negotiation mood.

  118. Re:Create something that violates a bunch of paten by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

    A good example of why you should think twice before setting up agreements about the right to all works of an employee.

    Just make sure that you as an employee really make that agreement stick.

    Of course - you can create an application on your free time that requires a lot of support and credit it to the employer. Then end your employment.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  119. You're screwed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You needed to have changed the contract(s) before you signed them. When presented with such contracts in the past, I simply line out and initial parts I don't agree to, and amend if necessary (rarely, except when changing terms such as notice of termination). A contract is a negotiation, not just a single sided presentation on the part of the company. In 100% of the cases I've done this, the company simply signs the contract as amended by me. Only once has any company even commented on it (to clarify existing personal IP I was working on, which might impact the what I was to work on for them. That was with Google :)

    If you quit and start up something that is in any way related to work you were doing, they might (and can) sue you, probably successfully. Even if they aren't successful, they will poison any relationship you have with current company ("hey, you never told us about this liability") which may get you fired from any current job, and make it very very difficult for you to be hired by anyone else (IP risk is something companies really try to avoid - the money is just too big)

    Not a lawyer, but I've dealt with IP before (for many and major companies). You made a beginners mistake. I did too, right out of college - never again, though.

    Write it off as experience, and get on with life. Lesson learned: never sign away your main asset like that again, in desperation to get a job. That's how the RIAA works with it's "artists". Or a pimp with a ho.

    It's up to you, though. Trying to get around it will only make things worse. If you're in California, you at least have no "non-compete". It means you could shift employers, negotiate a better contract with the new ones (like you own IP done on your own time with your own assets), and likely get around that way. In any case, the "axe", if there was one, would fall on you, and not your new company.

    If you live in a state where non-competes are binding, you are screwed.

  120. Bit late now by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

    When I get a contract with a clause like that, I say "this bit is just a minor problem, but needs fixing." If they balk, then the job is a bad fit anyway.

    In your situation, you need to renegotiate that contractual provision. I can't think of a way that won't involve a credible threat to leave. "i'd like to stay, but this is not really workable."

    Don't try to moonlight anonymously - success on a proprietary project will make you a great big target, and doing this on an open source project is laying legal minefields for whoever else tries to work on your project. You need to fix the actual problem.

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
  121. Use a relative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow! Grandma Susie sure is a fantastic C++ coder for a 81 year old. I used this reasoning when they tried to steal my asset management software I made (before I came to the company) after I deployed it in their environment.

  122. Employer != owner by Slorv · · Score: 2

    >The problem is: my employer has an IP policy that states that anything I do while under their employ is theirs, even when I'm off the clock

    Maybe I misunderstand but is that claim even legal?
    For them to claim ownership of products of all your thoughts while you are working a normal dayjob for them?
    What if you were to write a song in an evening, would they own that to?

    Beeing an emplyee is beeing a person who sells work during, mostly anyway, eight hours a day to an employeer. Your employer is not your owner.

    --
    Bikers.....The only people that understand why a dog hangs his head out a car window.
  123. Re:Create something that violates a bunch of paten by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    (Then offer to return as a highly paid consultant to support it.)

  124. BT, DT: (Was Re:Two mostly similar choices) by Terje+Mathisen · · Score: 2

    Before I got my first pure IT job (back in 1984) I was developing sw for my father-in-law's company, I mentioned this during the interview and got an exception clause that would allow me to keep on supporting that software.

    I have since then had a number of offers of new jobs/gone to multiple interviews: I have always mentioned the situation with my father-in-law and it has never been a problem.

    At the same time (1982-1984) I had also developed some terminal emulation/file transfer software which was moderately successful, I sold a site license to my new employer which at the same time gave me the rights to go on maintaining it and selling it to other customers. During the next 4-5 years those external sales paid for our little mountain cabin near Rjukan, Telemark.

    Terje

    --
    "almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"
  125. What I do. by ggendel · · Score: 1

    I have had similar "invention" agreements from all my employers. Their language seems to infer that working for them is the incubation that will bring on new ideas, so even if you're off-the-clock, it is because you are working for them that you came up with the idea at all. However, in the agreements is a request for things that you have/are working on so they will be exempted. I usually include a several page list of things that I've thought about, generic enough to cover almost any field outside of my day to day work.

    That said, if you come up with an idea not related to your tasks, they would be very hard pressed to make a case against you. If you come up with a better widget than the one you're doing their, they have a good case.

  126. Joel Spolsky's take on this by maple_shaft · · Score: 2

    Joel Spolsky, co-founder of StackExchange had probably the best answer to this question that I had read anywhere. http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/19422/if-im-working-at-a-company-do-they-have-intellectual-property-rights-to-the-st/20136#20136

  127. Ignore the stupid piece of paper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) There is a 98% chance your creative work won't be worth anything to anyone else and your employer won't care, so just consider it a hobby and do it. (don't blab about it to coworkers or friends)
    2) If it is mildly successful and someone wants to buy your IP (for a lot less money than you make from your salary), then just sell it and if your employer finds out then cut them in on the deal. Either they will value your services and keep you employed and appreciate a cut of the money or fire you because they don't like you anyway. (Your employer probably won't find out about it, so who cares)
    3) If it is wildly successful then use the money to quit and hire a good lawyer if your old company decides to sue you.

    or

    4) If you are rich and don't need a job to make a living, then follow all the stupid advice about renegotiating your contract and honoring your employement contract. They won't negotiate unless you are a high level employee. And they especially won't renegotiate after the fact, since they will figure you already have some potentially valuable IP and the mere fact that you want to renegotiate is circumstantial evidence of that fact, so they have nothing to gain except your continued employment.

  128. Post anonymously by cpghost · · Score: 1

    What's wrong with releasing your code under public domain anonymously (be sure to comb every file with a fine comb though before doing so)?

    --
    cpghost at Cordula's Web.
  129. Re:No by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 1

    No.

    If you signed a contract that says they can, it's probably not enforceable. Most likely, you did not sign such a contract.

    You may have signed one, in your example, that says the house design is their property, because that's what you produce. Not houses. If so, it's up to you to prove that you are on the right side of the law, or that the contract is invalid somehow.

    So what other industries do this? Anything that requires independent, creative thinking, the outcome of which could be patented or copyrighted, usually. Searching for "employer intellectual property ownership" gave a lot more info than I could possibly summarize.

    Bottom line: it's complicated, and it depends on what you signed, who you work for, and where you live. This page is not a bad place to start.

    http://www.intellectualpropertylawfirms.com/resources/intellectual-property/patents/employee-employer-patent-inventor.htm

  130. May vary dependent on where you are by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe in USA law is different, but in holland it is as simple as this:
    Whatever a (contract / eula / agreement) sais, if it is an unlawful statement, it is void. No matter what they say, or claim you have signed.

    Now, the reasons why companies to this is of course because of anti-competitive agreement. That is quite normal. The question is: do your side projects have anything to do with your companies business. If so, you'r pulling the short straw. If not so, then it doesn't mind what you signed, and only a judge could decide. (Mind you: dutch situation)

    I also had an employer who claimed exactly this. They were also fond on accenting that point. I only learned later, that it's all a big lie, or at least, very doubtful.

    Best thing to do is, shrug your shoulders. Use pseudonyms on the project you like to work on. Or never publish it at all. 'What doesn't know, doesn't harm'. Do your hobby projects as you used to. Do not publish under your own name if your company scares you.

    Bringing up the point for discussion could be an option, but, at the same time, it could turn against you. Don't wake sleeping dogs.

    There's law, contracts, moral and ethics. If you try to obey to the last 2, you should be fine.

    *2 cents from anonymous*

  131. do NOT tell them about your other work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First off, I think it varies from state to state how enforceable these contracts are. I believe in the company is headquartered in another state they claim you are under that states laws. I am not sure if that is accurate depending on what state you are in. However, if they sue you they will force you to pay a law and have him go to Texas to defend yourself.

    Even if they are not legally enforceable, they are financially enforceable. First off they can fire you and second off they have alot more money to throw at you than you do to defend yourself. That is there biggest threat. Defending a lawsuit is very expensive.

    The bottom line is NEVER tell your employer about side work. You never know if they will try to enforce some policy just because they know they can out spend you. Often times employees will fire you for doing any outside work. They want to own you. It is NOT worth the risk. I see some posts on here where some people can license material back to an employer. That is very few and very far between.

    The bottom line is, odds are they won't find out. If you think your business will take off. Quit. If they find out later on, state you did the work they are claiming after leaving the company. You will need to contact a lawyer about this. Find a contracts attorney. You can get an initial review for a about $200-300. Odds are they will try to get you to pay them a whole bunch more money to do some legal mumbo jumbo. Odds are you don't need this. Just keep your mouth shut.

    If you do start a business with it
    -- dont use your name in the business
    -- you can register your website through a 3rd party so when someone does a 'whois' on that site, your name won't come up
    -- they can find out, but its not hard to make it so its difficult for them to find out.

    The IP things are BS. I talked to a contract lawyer once and she told me stories about crazy employees who sue and then say 'ok' ill settle. Then change their minds. They drag these on for years just to cost you money. Some do it because they are jerks. Others do it, so they can scare other employees from doing the same thing. Employment agreements do NOT have to be legally enforceable to bankrupt you. It costs alot of money to defend yourself and employers know this.

  132. And? by shiftless · · Score: 1

    And this gives the company any moral right to you work, done completely outside of company time and resources.....how, exactly?

  133. Minnesota statute 181.78 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/getpub.php?pubtype=STAT_CHAP_SEC&year=2006&section=181.78

    If you don't use their IP or resources, and don't develop in their line of business or anticipated business, the employer can't claim it.

  134. I have a suggestion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...you shouldn't have signed documents agreeing to those practices at your current employer and found a different job.

  135. Honesty is not the best policy right now by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

    Honest is the best policy.

    Actually, corporations not claiming ownership of work they're not entitled to and have not paid for is the best policy. But corporations are driven by lawyers, so you know they'll go with what they can do, as opposed to what they should do. Shakespeare's character had it right.

    And in the meantime, if one has to forgo honesty in order to not be robbed, that's just as acceptable here as it is when you tell a cutpurse that you have no money, even though it is in your sock.

    Remember: something being "the law" does not in ANY way equate with it being RIGHT. At this point in time, it just means "government supported", which in turn is your assurance that it has been approved by a group of whom the vast majority are criminals by definition, having violated the constitution many times with malice aforethought.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    1. Re:Honesty is not the best policy right now by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      It's still far better, in the long run, to be honest with your employer than to cloak your actions in deception. Odds are, your idea is not going to take off. If it does, that's fantastic. But if it doesn't, you still have to work with these people every day. If they're being honest and upfront with you, you should be honest and up front with them.

      Now, this advice doesn't apply in the case of the asshole boss that thinks that those working below him belong to him. But if that's the case, it'd probably just be better to quit and work on your idea if you can.

  136. Check your state laws as well. Ask a lawyer. by technoshaun · · Score: 1

    Also some states will make this clause null and void. You need to check with an IP lawyer in your state for any confirmation but the as long as you do not use any of your employers assets and your work is unrelated to the core business of the company most states will not allow your employer to claim your private work as theirs.

  137. Mod parent +1 Informative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, no mod points for you today, but others please mod parent +1 Informative

  138. Where you are matters in terms of what to expect. by strat · · Score: 1

    I have dealt with this over the years in different ways. There are some U.S. states that pretty much explicitly pre-empt any assertion that what you do on your own time belongs to an employer. You might sign this away by contract, but enforceability is not consistent everywhere. I'm not a lawyer, but I've had to negotiate quite a few IP agreements.

    This is more relevant at initial hiring, but even the large stodgy shops will usually have employees declare existing intellectual property in which you have patent filings, etc. If you have a project going on or are a submitter to an open source project, declare that up front.

    Reasonable firms won't prevent you from working on things on your own time and with your own equipment (that's another key factor). I do realize that means there are quite a few unreasonable employers out there.

    I don't recommend subterfuge, unless you've consulted with an attorney first. If your project is not directly related to your employer's business, be up front with them, and also be prepared to explain how the good will that is generated from your other activities helps or can help you with your job. For example, if you work on an open source project and get to "network" with competent, helpful people who know stuff about things that make your company go, be sure to point that out. Obviously, I'm not suggesting that you say you'll shop your hard technical problems to the Internet for free technical assistance, but every other profession has societies of people who occasionally provide ideas or insight for problem solving. This is the same thing.

  139. Talk to a lawyer... by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

    There are many options; but you won't know which ones are really at your disposal until you talk with an appropriately practicing lawyer - that is, one that specializes in those kind of legal issues.

    Otherwise, go find a new job.

    --
    Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
  140. Lie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Say I did it, give me enough to make me rich, keep the rest and the tech. Easypeasy.

  141. Re:You can't negotiate WRONG by s73v3r · · Score: 1

    Because finding a new job is SOOOOOOOOOOOO easy in today's climate, right?

  142. just cheat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two questions: Are you married? Are there restrictions on work outside of your current company? You might be able to create a shell corporation in your spouse's (or a trusted friend's) name. Then develop your invention and patent it under their name (not yours so your company has no claim) and assign the rights to the shell corp (of which you just coincidentally happen to be a silent 50% partner). Although a word of caution, as others have stated, if this is in the realm of what you do for the company that currently employs you they will have dibs unless you quit since you signed the Feudal Contract.

  143. Easy Solution by Stupid+Crunt · · Score: 1

    Lie.

  144. Just think, in a true free-market system by company+suckup · · Score: 0

    scenarios such as the op's wouldn't exist. j/s.........

  145. ignore it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh hell yes You're employer's "agreement isn't worth the paper it,s written on. Full stop.

    I was tended an offer by SAIC. I actually bothered to read the employee agreement. It stated that anything I ever thought of forever after had to be submitted to them to see if they considered it to be related to anything they were thinking about going into. This meant that for the rest of my life I would submit all of anything to them. It also said that prior to working for them I agreed I had zero rights to any IP never having created anything apparently.

    I declined the honor and later approached an IP attorney. Long story short they can write anything they want in a contract an you can even agree to it and sign it but none of that makes it enforceable. Your employer's contract is not enforceable almost certainly. It's an intimidation tactic. The courts see these things, rightly, as q restraint against your ability to ply your trade and toss them most violently out of court. The lawyers who write these things are completely aware of this fact.

  146. Move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    California State law ensures what you invent on your own time with your own equipment is yours. I'm not sure about other states, but check yours.

  147. It varies depending on where you live. by lpq · · Score: 1

    It's worse that just not living in the right country - in the US, it can be about not living in the right state.

    Some states have a more pro-citizen, democratic leaning that is designed to keep people employed while others have a more pro-employer leaning that is designed to make working a privilege, (though they will call you lazy scum if you don't work).

    It **used** to be the case that rules like what you mention would be accepted in california, but that changed under decades of democratic reforms where employees won their freedom - it was decided that employees were NOT owned property or 'slaves', and that what you did in your off hours, as long as it wasn't directly tied to what you did at work (and that can be a point of dispute). Now such agreements are no longer legal and even if employees sign such rules, **in California**, they are invalid and unenforceable (unless the law has changed again when Schwarzenegger and the GOP was running CA into the ground along with Bush...)...

    The idea is that they don't own you outside of work -- on your own equipment. But it was heavily fought in court, so if your state hasn't already established precedent, it could be messy...

    When I first started work in CA decades ago, my employer regularly took 'work' from employee's off hours (now days it is considered 'theft') -- i.e. unless they pay you 24/7 (better be getting some good over time!), those other hours are yours. But they tried to rip me off as well, -- had developed SW before I came there -- and though I worked on it at home while I was there, it was listed in my 'pre-owned' inventions, so when they tried to take it as a free demo, and were told they'd have to at least give me a bonus or anything on the side -- (I wasn't greedy... a 500-1000 bonus at the time would have bought me off), but for them it was the principle, == if they paid me, then they'd have to start paying everyone for off hours work (even though in my case it was only because it was listed under my starting agreement)... The people who wanted to use it had no problem with paying me (they were in marketing)... but my direct management nixed it -- but got flack for it -- and that only added to my popularity with management there....*sigh*...

  148. Legality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd check the legality of such a clause in a contract (ie the employer getting your ideas/projects etc when on your own time). First, there is such a thing as 'Unfair Contract', where you can sue. Second, any clause which is invalid doesn't mean squat in a contract, so you might not run the risk of then owning anything you do on your own time. Check with a lawyer.

    I remember when I first started in IT (as a Database Admin/Programmer etc) there wa a clause in my contract whcih said, 'And anything else we ask you to do.' One day they asked me to strip a palet of marketing material and load it into tyhe back of a pickup truck, drive it to another location and load it onto another palet. When I protested they pointed to that clause in my contract. I later found out (when I did a marketing certificate at a college) that the clause is actually illegal. No employer can ask you to do something outside of the scope they employed you for. So, if it was something IT related, then they could have aske dme to do it, but striping palets and loading trucks is far from IT related and as such they couldn't legally tell me to do it regardless of the clause in the contract.

    So, my advice is, seek legal advice from an IP lawyer and find out if the clause is actually illegal, because technically, if the employer isn't paying you for the work, then what you do is your own business and not theirs. Of course, if it is legal, then it might be that you are expected to present the idea to the company for a 'yay' or 'nay', at which point if they say 'yay' you should receive creidt for it (and put that in for a pay rise at your next evaluation), or if 'nay', I'd get them to put in writing that they 'nayed' the idea and that you are free to work on it in your own time as your own project. Basically, cover yourself legally in case they try to turn around later and use that clause against you if the idea is successful, because you will have it in writing that they 'nayed' it and gave you a green light to pursue it without them having any claim to it.

  149. Leech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So don't tell me: you want to develop open source stuff on the side and have your company subsidise that effort? Just ease along with the something-for-nothing philosophy that permeates the OSS movement?
    Either: be honest with your management and say that's waht you want to do - you may not think that it is their time but if you are employed full time, then the moments of inspiration in the shower and on the way to the office DO belong to them.
    Or: get another contract or another job.

  150. quit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    quit and get another job. those kinds of IP policies are put in place by people who are inherently greedy? when you signed your employment contract / nda, did you really intend to sell your soul? if the answer is no, it's time to move on. learn how to garden too, so you needn't worry as much about where your next meal might come from.

  151. Some times it works and some times it don't! by asdw · · Score: 1

    I have been under many such contracts and find the wording very broad spectrum with many loops holes and here is how I weigh these type of situations.

    Is my "moonlighting" in the same line of products or services that would benefit the company or be in direct competition with the company I work for? If the answer is yes then there are two options quit the job and wait the amount of time in the initial contract when hiring which in most cases is a year before you can produce anything that would be in competition with the company so you better have a job at McDonalds for a year or another company without an IP in effect when hiring so you can produce your invention at the end of the year. Some companies will go to the extent to make sure you did not think of it while working with them or come up with the idea by something you discovered while working there, times are tough people and nobody will think about bending you over. OR keep your job and wait till you are laid off or retired to work on your side project and hope nobody else comes up with the same idea out of necessity as that is how most inventions are born in the first place.

    Now if the "moonlighting" has absolutely nothing to do with the company you work with in any form or fashion and couldn't contribute anything to that company in any way unless they started a new product line which 99.99% of the time that will not happen. In a case like that grab a sudo name and forge a head in a professional manner and hope the company you work for is a reputable company and will support your "moonlighting" (if they find out about it) and want to keep you as you may be more of an asset to them with your innovative thinking. Of course there is a certain amount of BS and the ability to pour it on as this will be effective... when in doubt LIE!

    Outside of those two options there really isn't much else you can do... there is ALWAYS a loop hole all you have to do is find it first!

    --
    STFU... GTFO... & RTFM
  152. What a JOKE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are they demanding your first born child too? I'd refuse to work for such a draconian company.

  153. Talk to them first. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've had a number of employers in recent years whose IP policies said they own everything, and when I was negotiating my employment I brought this up and we agreed that I would get an exception, in writing. Key to this was my specifying what the projects would be, and that these projects are not related to the company's business. (Not that they would not necessarily be useful to the company, but that they don't compete with the company in any way. And yes, that was explained in the written agreement.)

    Some employers can be nice about it if you're nice about it and they're not actually losing anything. So if I were in your shoes, I would approach the boss, explain what I wanted to do, explain that I have not started, explain how it doesn't compete with the company, ask nicely for a written exception from the IP policy for your specific project(s) that you name and define in advance, and ask if we could please get HR to place this exemption in my file. The worst that happens is the boss says no.

    That said, some employers can be real assholes about it, and those are the ones you should leave for greener pastures.

  154. no hawkers! by crutchy · · Score: 1

    protect yourself and your partners by hiring a tech startup lawyer

    I am a lawyer, and this is an area in which I practice

    nuff said