4 ms·

The default position might be something like that but anyone writing software professionally surely has explicit provisions in their employment contract that wo

The default position might be something like that but anyone writing software professionally surely has explicit provisions in their employment contract that would take precedence (as long as they hold up to any legal challenge of course).

ajb 5y ago
Contacts don't override every law. Ever heard of inalienable rights? Those are ones that you can't contact away.
- Silhouette 5y ago
  Which "inalienable right" applies here?
  - ajb 5y ago
    In fact in the UK I think you are right, my apologies. It's California where the Labour code protects inventions made in the employees own time: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=LAB&sectionNum=2870 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio....
masklinn 5y ago
> as long as they hold up to any legal challenge of course Which they don't because it makes no sense. Transpose to a car mechanic fixing up junkers in their spare time, does the fixed junker belong to the company? Of course not.
- Xylakant 5y ago
  This is not a good analogy. A substantial chunk of the value of software is often the idea, not only the time worked on something. Ideas and inventions don’t happen on a schedule. Think of a chemist that is tasked with finding a way to synthesize a compound. He tries all day at work, and in the evening, on the couch, he’s struck by a bolt of enlightenment. Who does that idea belong to? German law would be pretty clear - to the company. And often, software is similar.
  - masklinn 5y ago
    > And often, software is similar. That only holds if the side-project is exactly what the company does, and even then it’s debatable: if a person is interested in problem X and has personal projects around X, and the company hires them because if that, do they really expect that person to stop being interested in X on a personal level?
    - Xylakant 5y ago
      It’s often sufficient if the general field of work matches, though to a varying degree. > if a person is interested in problem X and has personal projects around X, and the company hires them because if that, do they really expect that person to stop being interested in X on a personal level? This is exactly where you start entering a problematic grey area. The employer hired and pays the employee exactly to gain access and make use of that knowledge and interest and pays a wage exactly for that. And at the same time, the employee wants to continue working on their open source project, giving away exactly that knowledge for free, which potentially diminishes the value that the employer pays for. There’s a fundamental tension here which is difficult to resolve. Open communication helps, explicitly spelling out the boundaries as well. It’s impossible to tell from the tweet which side failed here to what degree, but getting a sign-off from management in edge cases is definitely a good idea.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
  - stefan_ 5y ago
    That's a bizarre comment because the least protected thing here is the idea. This guy is free to get a new job and write a new library from scratch, or just tell his new company to do X + Y. Also, of course, German law does not allow the US-style overarching IP clauses at all.
    - Xylakant 5y ago
      > This guy is free to get a new job and write a new library from scratch, or just tell his new company to do X + Y. But that’s not what’s the issue at stake here. If I understand the tweet correctly, the code in question was written during the time of employment, though in their spare time. Depending on the exact situation, this could be problematic - for example if internal knowledge of the employer was used or if a profit motive enters the picture (sponsorship for the open source library, as in this case) Both would no longer be an issue if the code was written after employment ends, unless there’s an explicit noncompete in place.
- Silhouette 5y ago
  I am just relaying information that I've paid money for multiple lawyers to explain to me in the past. If you think they are wrong, an explanation or counterexamples would be helpful.

ajb 5y ago

Contacts don't override every law. Ever heard of inalienable rights? Those are ones that you can't contact away.

Silhouette 5y ago
Which "inalienable right" applies here?
- ajb 5y ago
  In fact in the UK I think you are right, my apologies. It's California where the Labour code protects inventions made in the employees own time: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=LAB&sectionNum=2870 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio....

masklinn 5y ago

> as long as they hold up to any legal challenge of course Which they don't because it makes no sense. Transpose to a car mechanic fixing up junkers in their spare time, does the fixed junker belong to the company? Of course not.

Xylakant 5y ago
This is not a good analogy. A substantial chunk of the value of software is often the idea, not only the time worked on something. Ideas and inventions don’t happen on a schedule. Think of a chemist that is tasked with finding a way to synthesize a compound. He tries all day at work, and in the evening, on the couch, he’s struck by a bolt of enlightenment. Who does that idea belong to? German law would be pretty clear - to the company. And often, software is similar.
- masklinn 5y ago
  > And often, software is similar. That only holds if the side-project is exactly what the company does, and even then it’s debatable: if a person is interested in problem X and has personal projects around X, and the company hires them because if that, do they really expect that person to stop being interested in X on a personal level?
  - Xylakant 5y ago
    It’s often sufficient if the general field of work matches, though to a varying degree. > if a person is interested in problem X and has personal projects around X, and the company hires them because if that, do they really expect that person to stop being interested in X on a personal level? This is exactly where you start entering a problematic grey area. The employer hired and pays the employee exactly to gain access and make use of that knowledge and interest and pays a wage exactly for that. And at the same time, the employee wants to continue working on their open source project, giving away exactly that knowledge for free, which potentially diminishes the value that the employer pays for. There’s a fundamental tension here which is difficult to resolve. Open communication helps, explicitly spelling out the boundaries as well. It’s impossible to tell from the tweet which side failed here to what degree, but getting a sign-off from management in edge cases is definitely a good idea.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- stefan_ 5y ago
  That's a bizarre comment because the least protected thing here is the idea. This guy is free to get a new job and write a new library from scratch, or just tell his new company to do X + Y. Also, of course, German law does not allow the US-style overarching IP clauses at all.
  - Xylakant 5y ago
    > This guy is free to get a new job and write a new library from scratch, or just tell his new company to do X + Y. But that’s not what’s the issue at stake here. If I understand the tweet correctly, the code in question was written during the time of employment, though in their spare time. Depending on the exact situation, this could be problematic - for example if internal knowledge of the employer was used or if a profit motive enters the picture (sponsorship for the open source library, as in this case) Both would no longer be an issue if the code was written after employment ends, unless there’s an explicit noncompete in place.
Silhouette 5y ago
I am just relaying information that I've paid money for multiple lawyers to explain to me in the past. If you think they are wrong, an explanation or counterexamples would be helpful.