4 ms·

Run away. No client/employer is worth that kind of baggage. It's even worse than a non-compete: instead of you simply being prohibited from competing with them

Run away. No client/employer is worth that kind of baggage. It's even worse than a non-compete: instead of you simply being prohibited from competing with them, they automatically own your creations.

commandlinefan 9y ago
Although I agree with you - no client/employer is worth that kind of baggage - I was sort of surprised, after four months of unemployment when my last company shut down abruptly (no warning, no severance), just how many things seem negotiable when you're starting to worry about unemployment running out.
- bluGill 9y ago
  Fortunately when that is your only offer and you don't have a job you can tell the court you signed that under duress. Which is to say courts will not look favorably on the whole thing. Courts tend look unfavorably on any agreement that doens't allow you to earn a living doing what you know how to do. As such non-competes as bad as they are are very hard to actually enforce in court. The threat of going to court though can be scary. Remember if you need legal advice ask a lawyer not some random idiot on a forum.
  - vinceguidry 9y ago
    The problem with noncompetes isn't that you'll get dragged into court over them, it's that old employer makes a call to new employer and you get shown the door. Now you have to sue somebody to get your rights upheld.
    - Bartweiss 9y ago
      The upside is that in at least some cases, you can warn the new company and they'll agree to fight the thing - or even preemptively tell the previous company off. Obviously that's mostly going to work for people with major leverage in the job market, but there have been some notable success stories lately of people not getting sacked.
ryandrake 9y ago
Pretty much every employer I’ve ever worked for has laid claim to all IP I produce, even on my own time using my own equipment at home. This is a very common clause in any tech company’s employment agreement. If you’re going to run away from these, your employment options are severely limited. The “within 1 year” thing, however is one I haven’t seen before. Ugly!
- jdbernard 9y ago
  I've always pushed back against "all IP even on my own time with my own equipment." You're right that it's common in tech employment, but it's never been a deal-breaker for me. ---- edited to elobrate You can almost always reach a compromise if you aren't a jerk about it and can show you understand the company's concerns. Typically I have it modified so that if I'm using their resources at all (office, computer, pen they bought me, etc.) it's theirs. Or if it's directly related to their core business it's theirs. Note that this is separate from a non-compete. The key thing is to find some clear dividing criteria that is 1. generous to the company and 2. within my control (like choosing to use my own machine). Same idea behind the "one person cuts, the other chooses" method of dividing a cake. I'm never going to give a company all of my output carte blanche. I want to contribute to open source. I want to make little (unrelated) fun things on my own and not worry about being sued if it ends up becoming popular. The company has a reasonable fear of people competing against them while on their payroll. Both sides can reasonably expect some protection.
  - ryandrake 9y ago
    In the past, when I’ve tried to politely push back against these, the response has always been a firm “sign the agreement unmodified or GTFO.” When your employer has 500 lawyers, you do what they say or get back to the job hunt.
    - jdbernard 9y ago
      Yeah, if they're not going to let me have any say in matters that directly affect my ability to put food on the table for my family then I'm glad to walk. If your prospective manager isn't willing/able to go to bat for you on things like this it's a good bet they're not going to be willing/able to go to bat on lots of other things that matter while you are there. Not worth it. Or, if they really are your only option at the moment, you can also sign with the intention of claiming you did so under duress if sued, but I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with that.

Run away. No client/employer is worth that kind of baggage. It's even worse than a non-compete: instead of you simply being prohibited from competing with them, they automatically own your creations.

commandlinefan 9y ago

Although I agree with you - no client/employer is worth that kind of baggage - I was sort of surprised, after four months of unemployment when my last company shut down abruptly (no warning, no severance), just how many things seem negotiable when you're starting to worry about unemployment running out.

bluGill 9y ago
Fortunately when that is your only offer and you don't have a job you can tell the court you signed that under duress. Which is to say courts will not look favorably on the whole thing. Courts tend look unfavorably on any agreement that doens't allow you to earn a living doing what you know how to do. As such non-competes as bad as they are are very hard to actually enforce in court. The threat of going to court though can be scary. Remember if you need legal advice ask a lawyer not some random idiot on a forum.
- vinceguidry 9y ago
  The problem with noncompetes isn't that you'll get dragged into court over them, it's that old employer makes a call to new employer and you get shown the door. Now you have to sue somebody to get your rights upheld.
  - Bartweiss 9y ago
    The upside is that in at least some cases, you can warn the new company and they'll agree to fight the thing - or even preemptively tell the previous company off. Obviously that's mostly going to work for people with major leverage in the job market, but there have been some notable success stories lately of people not getting sacked.

ryandrake 9y ago

Pretty much every employer I’ve ever worked for has laid claim to all IP I produce, even on my own time using my own equipment at home. This is a very common clause in any tech company’s employment agreement. If you’re going to run away from these, your employment options are severely limited. The “within 1 year” thing, however is one I haven’t seen before. Ugly!

jdbernard 9y ago
I've always pushed back against "all IP even on my own time with my own equipment." You're right that it's common in tech employment, but it's never been a deal-breaker for me. ---- edited to elobrate You can almost always reach a compromise if you aren't a jerk about it and can show you understand the company's concerns. Typically I have it modified so that if I'm using their resources at all (office, computer, pen they bought me, etc.) it's theirs. Or if it's directly related to their core business it's theirs. Note that this is separate from a non-compete. The key thing is to find some clear dividing criteria that is 1. generous to the company and 2. within my control (like choosing to use my own machine). Same idea behind the "one person cuts, the other chooses" method of dividing a cake. I'm never going to give a company all of my output carte blanche. I want to contribute to open source. I want to make little (unrelated) fun things on my own and not worry about being sued if it ends up becoming popular. The company has a reasonable fear of people competing against them while on their payroll. Both sides can reasonably expect some protection.
- ryandrake 9y ago
  In the past, when I’ve tried to politely push back against these, the response has always been a firm “sign the agreement unmodified or GTFO.” When your employer has 500 lawyers, you do what they say or get back to the job hunt.
  - jdbernard 9y ago
    Yeah, if they're not going to let me have any say in matters that directly affect my ability to put food on the table for my family then I'm glad to walk. If your prospective manager isn't willing/able to go to bat for you on things like this it's a good bet they're not going to be willing/able to go to bat on lots of other things that matter while you are there. Not worth it. Or, if they really are your only option at the moment, you can also sign with the intention of claiming you did so under duress if sued, but I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with that.