4 ms·

This is a thorny issue because say you could make the argument that if I spend 5 years writing and rewriting code from 0.1 to 0.8 at company A to understand a d

This is a thorny issue because say you could make the argument that if I spend 5 years writing and rewriting code from 0.1 to 0.8 at company A to understand a domain, then I move to company B and write 0.9 and 1.0 in the same domain and make a pile of $$$, then company A should somehow be compensated even if the code itself is not exactly the same (which it wouldn't be since you learned from mistakes made). On the other hand if you take, for example, an engineer who learns to build bridges and builds a lot of bridges in one company, and then moves to a different company still building bridges, one would not think that just because they build a great bridge at company B, company A should be compensated. Where do you draw the line between 'improving your craft / becoming a better software developer' to 'taking a company's IP'?

perlgeek 10y ago
The issue of potential IP transfer is why companies sometimes include non-compete clauses in their employment contracts. I don't know if they can be enforced in the relevant jurisdictions though.
rhino369 10y ago
The way the law usually protects is via trade secret law. So the deciding factor is if you are later using information that was a trade secret. Trade secrets have to have information that isn't known to the public. For the bridge example, just because they taught you how to build a great bridge, doesn't mean it was a trade secret. But if they had some sort of special sauce on how to build a bridge, it could be. It's more complicated than this. They actually have to keep the information secret, usually through NDAs, controlling code, not letting people show it off at conferences, etc. This sort of "mind" trade secret is hard to deal with. There isn't a clear distinction between talent/skill and information owned by your former employer.

perlgeek 10y ago

The issue of potential IP transfer is why companies sometimes include non-compete clauses in their employment contracts. I don't know if they can be enforced in the relevant jurisdictions though.

rhino369 10y ago

The way the law usually protects is via trade secret law. So the deciding factor is if you are later using information that was a trade secret. Trade secrets have to have information that isn't known to the public. For the bridge example, just because they taught you how to build a great bridge, doesn't mean it was a trade secret. But if they had some sort of special sauce on how to build a bridge, it could be. It's more complicated than this. They actually have to keep the information secret, usually through NDAs, controlling code, not letting people show it off at conferences, etc. This sort of "mind" trade secret is hard to deal with. There isn't a clear distinction between talent/skill and information owned by your former employer.