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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
assuming it still even works 5 years from now, the battery life will have decayed to the point where it will be barely usable
You mean like a laptop? And before you say something about, "You can work with the laptop plugged in!", remember you can do the exact same with a tablet.
and if you think you will have the newest version of the OS available on it, excuse me while I laugh my ass of at your naiveté.
And how is that different than the 90s, when desktop computing really started to take off?
a regular PC is just straight up better in so many ways.
Not really. Office might be able to do 5% more, but how often do you use that extra 5%? And what are the costs needed to get that extra 5%? I'm guessing to get Office the way you want it, you're going to need to use an x86 device, which instantly cuts your battery life down to the 2-3 hour range, as opposed to 7-8 hours for an ARM tablet.
Slashdot Mirror
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.
I find it extremely disgusting that someone has to be "worth something" in order for their rights to not be trampled.
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?
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.
Wow, you lack a spine don't you?
Either that, or they just want to be able to eat.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Depends on what it is, how close to the core business your idea is, and how big of a dick your employer is.
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.
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?
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.
They've had multiple lawyers work on creating that contract. It can't hurt to have one in your corner working for you.
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.
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.
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.
They constitute "Exclusive rights to an idea for a lengthy period of time", so it's close enough.
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.
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.
assuming it still even works 5 years from now, the battery life will have decayed to the point where it will be barely usable
You mean like a laptop? And before you say something about, "You can work with the laptop plugged in!", remember you can do the exact same with a tablet.
and if you think you will have the newest version of the OS available on it, excuse me while I laugh my ass of at your naiveté.
And how is that different than the 90s, when desktop computing really started to take off?
a regular PC is just straight up better in so many ways.
Depends on your use cases.
Yes, but that's the desktop/x86 version of Win8, isn't it?
You had better do more than just that. You had better make different modes that work differently in tablet mode and desktop mode.
Not really. Office might be able to do 5% more, but how often do you use that extra 5%? And what are the costs needed to get that extra 5%? I'm guessing to get Office the way you want it, you're going to need to use an x86 device, which instantly cuts your battery life down to the 2-3 hour range, as opposed to 7-8 hours for an ARM tablet.