4 ms·
Indeed I did read the thread. The author's employment agreement specified that the employee would submit to a process by which Google determines what of his sid
by xibalba 7y ago
Indeed I did read the thread. The author's employment agreement specified that the employee would submit to a process by which Google determines what of his side work it will claim copyright on. To claim that the employment agreement allows employees to own their side work free, clear, and without Google's approval is simply not true.
People's greatest asset is themselves and their time. It is most effective to deprive companies like Google of this asset (which is their lifeblood) as a means of protest and a lever of change. But I do take your point. Frankly, this thread just feels like whinging to me.
- elicash 7y agoI think your response is a fair one, but the counter-argument I'd make to you is that Google is so powerful that if the employees were able to make a change that the ripple effects throughout the industry would be tremendous. As an individual, it's possible the biggest thing you can do alone is control where you spend your time. But collectively, it's possible the biggest impact of employees would be to change things on the job.