4 ms·

"what with it having so much to do with state, federal and international law and treaty" Would love to see specific citations showing that Google has no choice

by bugsy 16y ago

"what with it having so much to do with state, federal and international law and treaty" Would love to see specific citations showing that Google has no choice but to claim ownership of all its employee's projects during their own free time at home or elsewhere not at work. I thought slavery was banned in most countries, it's amazing to now hear that it is required under international treaty. Greatly looking forward to those specific citations of how specifically Google has no choice in this because of "state, federal and international law and treaty".

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
- bugsy 16y ago
  He's gone beyond saying it is a voluntary contract. He said the contract terms being discussed are required under state, federal and international law. Thanks for the downvote!
  - lionhearted 16y ago
    For the ridiculous slavery analogy. You've got a top Google legal person here explaining his thought process clearly and in honest, not-just-PC terms, and you're waving your arms around. I don't necessarily disagree with your points, but it's bad for discussion. Anyway, I deleted my comment since I didn't want to get into an argument here, it's not that important to me. I don't even 100% disagree with you, but clean up the tone a little bit and less handwaving? That kind of thing is what makes people want to brush off criticism instead of responding, which is really bad for discussion. I think it's really cool that a person on the Google legal team is explaining their thinking here reasonably and clearly.
    - cookiecaper 16y ago
      I don't think cdibona is a lawyer or on Google Legal. Last I knew he was "director of open-source operations" or something like that. He is a developer I think. I also think he had some involvement with SourceForge back in the day but am not sure.
      - BarkMore 16y ago
        Chris is the Open Source Programs Manager at Google. He handles open source matters and policies for Google, among other tasks. He is not a developer.

by bugsy 16y ago

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

bugsy 16y ago
He's gone beyond saying it is a voluntary contract. He said the contract terms being discussed are required under state, federal and international law. Thanks for the downvote!
- lionhearted 16y ago
  For the ridiculous slavery analogy. You've got a top Google legal person here explaining his thought process clearly and in honest, not-just-PC terms, and you're waving your arms around. I don't necessarily disagree with your points, but it's bad for discussion. Anyway, I deleted my comment since I didn't want to get into an argument here, it's not that important to me. I don't even 100% disagree with you, but clean up the tone a little bit and less handwaving? That kind of thing is what makes people want to brush off criticism instead of responding, which is really bad for discussion. I think it's really cool that a person on the Google legal team is explaining their thinking here reasonably and clearly.
  - cookiecaper 16y ago
    I don't think cdibona is a lawyer or on Google Legal. Last I knew he was "director of open-source operations" or something like that. He is a developer I think. I also think he had some involvement with SourceForge back in the day but am not sure.
    - BarkMore 16y ago
      Chris is the Open Source Programs Manager at Google. He handles open source matters and policies for Google, among other tasks. He is not a developer.