4 ms·
In the US, it's possible for your employer to own your ideas: http://www.salon.com/2004/08/18/evan_brown/ http://www.salon.com/2004/08/18/evan_brown/ Follow-u
by adekok 9y ago
In the US, it's possible for your employer to own your ideas:
http://www.salon.com/2004/08/18/evan_brown/ http://www.salon.com/2004/08/18/evan_brown/
Follow-up:
https://everything2.com/title/The+Thoughts+of+Evan+Brown https://everything2.com/title/The+Thoughts+of+Evan+Brown
Solution: never disclose anything to your employer unless absolutely required. If you have a new idea, keep it quiet until you quit your job.
FTA:
(After 5 1/2 years of litigation, Judge Curt B. Henderson of Collin County, Texas' 219th District Court ruled in favor of Alcatel, and Brown was obliged to fully disclose the idea to Alcatel and only Alcatel, and to repay in full Alcatel's legal fees of more than $330,000, which according to Brown forced him to sell his house and other assets.
During the court case, Brown argued that since his idea had never been committed to paper or physically manifested in any way, there were no grounds for the company to claim ownership of his very thoughts, and he drew comparisons to the fact that an invention cannot be copyrighted or patented until it is transferred from an idea onto paper.
He didn't handle his case well, which torpedoed it. But in parts of the US, yes... anything you do during the course of your employment is owned by the employer.
As a contractor, I've been asked to sign contracts with similar clauses. Uh... no. I have other customers, and you don't own what they pay me to do. Their typical counter is "But this is a standard clause".
Telling them to "no contract" is usually the only option. They just can't understand why an entirely one-sided contract isn't good for me.
- sverige 9y agoI agree with what you are saying, particularly about 1) Evan Brown making his own case weak, and 2) not signing such contracts where it is bad for your business. The articles were valuable - thanks! This is different, though, from the case where you are employed as a secretary for a bodyguard company and then work as a musician outside of your regular employment, isn't it? I mean, suppose Adele was the secretary and then started her musical career during that time. Would the bodyguard company be entitled to royalties from her catalog? I don't think so, and I don't think this case says they would either.
- adekok 9y ago> This is different, though, from the case where you are employed as a secretary for a bodyguard company and then work as a musician outside of your regular employment, isn't it? Not really. If the contract states they own everything you do while you're employed by them, they really do own everything. As for Adele, she's British. Such clauses are generally null and void in the English Common Law system. Your employer owns what they pay you do to, and what you create using employer tools. But if you work as a computer programmer, and invent a better mousetrap at home, your employer can't claim ownership of the mousetrap.
- sverige 9y agoAre you saying if it were Madonna instead of Adele, then some bodyguard company owner could be retired in Costa Rica on his earnings from "Papa Don't Preach" if Madonna had signed such a contract when she started working there as a secretary? Is it contractual only? (OP seemed to indicate that it was any employment, so I'm still wondering what country this might be.)
- erikb 9y agoI'm not in the US but that is exactly how it happened to me. Boss thought my idea was his because I'm his employee. Lawyers thought the same.