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?"
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.
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.
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'.
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
*all* contracts start in the favour of the people who wrote them.
you failed contract law