5 ms·
To everyone who replied to this question: no need to speculate on this, the IPA is Exhibit A https://regmedia.co.uk/2019/12/10/apple_v_gerard_williams.pdf https
by dchest 7y ago
To everyone who replied to this question: no need to speculate on this, the IPA is Exhibit A https://regmedia.co.uk/2019/12/10/apple_v_gerard_williams.pdf https://regmedia.co.uk/2019/12/10/apple_v_gerard_williams.pd...
(William's lawyers claim the IPA is void: https://regmedia.co.uk/2019/12/09/applevwilliamscounter.pdf https://regmedia.co.uk/2019/12/09/applevwilliamscounter.pdf)
- ryandrake 7y agoThanks for pointing it out. I think a lot of people are downvoting this because they don’t want to believe it’s true. I worked there in the past and can tell you this is 100% truly part of tour employment agreement. They even forbid you from having a personal Apple Developer account while you work there. Apple is very protective of anything that they even perceive might be their IP.
- raphlinus 7y agoIn addition (and this is slightly offtopic to the lawsuit itself, apologies), aside from a few high profile open source projects like LLVM that help drive their business, the default is that Apple employees are not allowed to contribute to open source projects. This is why you see so few Apple contributors in open source projects. This is in sharp contrast to, say, Google, which actively encourages open source work in a number of ways. Making it relevant to the original topic, that's a fairly common path for people to bring technology out of the company. I'd personally argue that it's ethical, ethical, and of benefit to society. Whether companies think that such lenient approaches to open source benefit them apparently vary pretty widely from company to company.