3 ms·

Not true. You need explicit permission (there is a process for obtaining it, and it is very lightweight as I've done it myself). The general idea is that you ge

Not true. You need explicit permission (there is a process for obtaining it, and it is very lightweight as I've done it myself). The general idea is that you get permission without much hassle if you develop something that doesn't compete with Google. You need to argue your case otherwise. Source: I'm a Googler that went through the process before. Edit #1 for all Googlers reading this: search "IARC" internally and you should land on the proper page to kickstart the process.

kyrra 5y ago
Btw, Google actually publishes this documentation externally. https://opensource.google/docs/releasing/ https://opensource.google/docs/releasing/
- q3k 5y ago
  They removed the `go/iarc` mirror recently, now seemingly only available on the wayback machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20210710210932/https://opensource.google/docs/iarc/ https://web.archive.org/web/20210710210932/https://opensourc...
  - kyrra 5y ago
    Well that interesting. Thanks for pointing that out. Wonder why they did that.
- marcyb5st 5y ago
  Thanks, I didn't know this. I thought it was only internal stuff.
tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago
Many companies make claims over their employees' intellectual property. How much of a claim they actually have legally is a different question, which depends on the country (and sometimes state) where the employee works, and companies routinely attempt to claim more than they legally can. Compare e.g. https://thebusinessprofessor.com/en_US/property-law/california-labor-code-2870-definition https://thebusinessprofessor.com/en_US/property-law/californ... I bet Google lacks the copyright for many of the projects they claim.
- q3k 5y ago
  > I bet Google lacks the copyright for many of the projects they claim. Good luck taking Google to court.
- marcyb5st 5y ago
  Maybe true, but I am unwilling to try my luck. I mean, the process I mentioned above takes 30 minutes [1] if it's clear you aren't competing with Google and so I don't see a major issue about playing it safe and have written consent to develop your idea/project. [1] you fill a form with the general idea description, you explain succinctly why it doesn't compete to any Google product, and you acknowledge you won't use Google time and resources to develop it. Then a committee reviews it and in ~1 week you get your approval or request for more details.
  - q3k 5y ago
    It takes maybe 30 minutes to fill out, but the O(days) approval latency is what absolutely killed me. No way to do impromptu commits to random non-Google-license-approved projects, no way to hack together something with friends over a beer, no way to quickly bash together a proof of concept and release it the same evening. It might work for people who chisel away at their own long-term one-person pet projects, but breaks down if you're used to quickly hacking away collaboratively in various groups. Especially if you're an active member of a hackerspace.
- goohle 5y ago
  Many countries have a "formula" (legal definition) for a "contract", which include fair exchange of something for something else, e.g. time and labor for money. If Google forces their developers to work for free (labor for nothing), then it fails to meet legal definition of the contract. IMHO, such "forced labor for free" is a form of slavery. Slavery is forbidden by law. If a developer want to publish his project under Google brand, then exchange may be considered as fair (project code for Google branding).
codewiz 5y ago
The IARC process is only necessary when Google might own copyright in the first place (those gray areas I mentioned earlier). I went through the IARC process 2 years ago for a startup I was about to found in Tokyo, and obtaining clearance was easy, as you say. It's an extra precaution to avoid future litigation, but not legally required if you keep your personal coding activity clearly and provably separate from your work activity.

kyrra 5y ago

Btw, Google actually publishes this documentation externally. https://opensource.google/docs/releasing/ https://opensource.google/docs/releasing/

q3k 5y ago
They removed the `go/iarc` mirror recently, now seemingly only available on the wayback machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20210710210932/https://opensource.google/docs/iarc/ https://web.archive.org/web/20210710210932/https://opensourc...
- kyrra 5y ago
  Well that interesting. Thanks for pointing that out. Wonder why they did that.
marcyb5st 5y ago
Thanks, I didn't know this. I thought it was only internal stuff.

tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago

Many companies make claims over their employees' intellectual property. How much of a claim they actually have legally is a different question, which depends on the country (and sometimes state) where the employee works, and companies routinely attempt to claim more than they legally can. Compare e.g. https://thebusinessprofessor.com/en_US/property-law/california-labor-code-2870-definition https://thebusinessprofessor.com/en_US/property-law/californ... I bet Google lacks the copyright for many of the projects they claim.

q3k 5y ago
> I bet Google lacks the copyright for many of the projects they claim. Good luck taking Google to court.
marcyb5st 5y ago
Maybe true, but I am unwilling to try my luck. I mean, the process I mentioned above takes 30 minutes [1] if it's clear you aren't competing with Google and so I don't see a major issue about playing it safe and have written consent to develop your idea/project. [1] you fill a form with the general idea description, you explain succinctly why it doesn't compete to any Google product, and you acknowledge you won't use Google time and resources to develop it. Then a committee reviews it and in ~1 week you get your approval or request for more details.
- q3k 5y ago
  It takes maybe 30 minutes to fill out, but the O(days) approval latency is what absolutely killed me. No way to do impromptu commits to random non-Google-license-approved projects, no way to hack together something with friends over a beer, no way to quickly bash together a proof of concept and release it the same evening. It might work for people who chisel away at their own long-term one-person pet projects, but breaks down if you're used to quickly hacking away collaboratively in various groups. Especially if you're an active member of a hackerspace.
goohle 5y ago
Many countries have a "formula" (legal definition) for a "contract", which include fair exchange of something for something else, e.g. time and labor for money. If Google forces their developers to work for free (labor for nothing), then it fails to meet legal definition of the contract. IMHO, such "forced labor for free" is a form of slavery. Slavery is forbidden by law. If a developer want to publish his project under Google brand, then exchange may be considered as fair (project code for Google branding).

codewiz 5y ago

The IARC process is only necessary when Google might own copyright in the first place (those gray areas I mentioned earlier). I went through the IARC process 2 years ago for a startup I was about to found in Tokyo, and obtaining clearance was easy, as you say. It's an extra precaution to avoid future litigation, but not legally required if you keep your personal coding activity clearly and provably separate from your work activity.