4 ms·

This was given to me after I was already hired. If I leave the job I'll have no way to support my kids.

dekhn 5y ago
this is something you need to dicuss with an employment attorney. Either way, you're working with terrible people and if you feel you need to sign this to keep your job and support your family, you're being exploited. Is this in the US, in a major city?
- fallingfrog 5y ago
  Yes, but I'm not going to say exactly where.
  - dekhn 5y ago
    OK you need to find a lawyer to get real advice immediately. You can't just dump something like this on HN and ask for advice without providing enough context for us to advise. This doesn't like a big company, so in many ways my suspicion is this is a small company with a greedy founder and lawyer and they are taking advantage of employees. If it's a large company, they should know better. If I were to handle this myself, I'd first check to see whether I was 100% convinced that I needed to keep a job to support my family, because voluntarily signining away IP rights like this is a terrible idea, even if it is legal and/or enforceble. Next, i'd evaluate whether I could get away with not signing the form. Are they making it a condition for further employment? An implied threat you'll be fired? My guess is no, it's really a bluff, they want you to sign, but if you pushed back correcftly, they'd fold. However, it's a delicate thing to do that.
  - fallingfrog 5y ago
    I've only been at the company 3 days and they sent this in a mass email to everyone to sign ASAP. I'm too new to have any leverage but I've been unemployed for 3 months and I really need money.
    - jevoten 5y ago
      Consider networking with your co-workers. You may not have much leverage on your own, but you do as a group. They probably don't like that clause either. But they also might not be aware of it, or how severe it is. Make sure they know. Especially the "or anticipated future business", which is a potentially arbitrarily broad category. And make sure to point out to your co-workers that, if they sign, the company could claim any idea they have in the future is based on one they had in the past, that they signed over to the company. And that this could impact their future employment, as employers might open themselves to legal liability if this company decides to sue them, on the logic that they are benefiting from your ideas, which they own. In sum, this is a catastrophically bad contract, and the only way they'll get everyone to sign it is if your co-workers aren't aware of how bad it is. So make sure they are acutely aware.
    - cafard 5y ago
      My sister-in-law got a ridiculous non-compete during her employment at a government contractor. It was sent broadcast if not to all employees, then to many in her general area. She is a lawyer, my brother is a lawyer, and between them they drafted a non-compete she would be willing to sign. The contractor sent it out with minimal changes as the non-compete to be signed. So talk to a lawyer. I doubt you're the only person with questions.
  - JPLeRouzic 5y ago
    It is possible find a text on DDG which is very similar: (a) The Employee has attached hereto, as Exhibit A, a list describing all discoveries, ideas, ... which were created,... by the Employee prior to the Employee’s employment by the Company ..., which relate ... to the ... business of the Company, and which are not assigned to the Company ... or, if no such list is attached, Employee represents that there are no Prior Developments. I am not a layer, nor even a native speaker, but it looks to me that this company does not want to steal prior ideas or inventions, but wants to protect them from future claims of ownership by an (ex) employee. So the employee has to provide a list of ideas/inventions/etc that (s)he claims as their own. Indeed I may be entirely wrong.
    - dekhn 5y ago
      The quoted text you provide is about telling a new employer about past inventions. That's standard at any big company. The text the poster quoted is a transfer of that IP. that is not standard.
- fallingfrog 5y ago
  It came in an email saying they need it to be signed ASAP. I feel like they should at least give me time to ask a lawyer or something.
  - willcipriano 5y ago
    What is the consideration[0]? It's not employment since you are already working there and past consideration is not valid consideration. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consideration_under_American_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consideration_under_American_l...
    - codingdave 5y ago
      Some jurisdictions are ok with continued employment being consideration. Some are not. Hence the need to ask a lawyer.
      - willcipriano 5y ago
        Do you have a example of one? That would be rather exploitative. Firing someone because they refuse to accept a one sided contract where they gain nothing would work in a at will state, but you'd certainly be able to collect unemployment.
        codingdave 5y ago
        Based on my understanding from past experience (as well as googling it just now), that is true for the majority of US states. FYI, this is a writeup I found for Wisconsin when I just searched --> https://www.littler.com/publication-press/publication/wisconsin-supreme-court-rules-continued-employment-lawful https://www.littler.com/publication-press/publication/wiscon... Contracts have no legal requirement to be fair or balanced. Consideration does need to exist, but does not need to be equitable. So yes, it is exploitative, but that does not make it illegal.
  - codingdave 5y ago
    Are you already hired, as in already started work? If so, you definitely need to talk to a lawyer before signing. Putting pressure on you like that for a contract that is new, after you have started work, may have additional legal aspects - some jurisdictions do not allow that without additional compensation. IANAL, but call one before acting.
codingdave 5y ago
OK, there is another way to proceed - you could put a price on the value of your prior inventions, and ask for them to purchase those rights. Either way, this is not binding on you unless you sign it. I agree with the other comment that calling an attorney is a good idea, as is walking away from these guys. There are a lot of job opportunities out there right now.
- jart 5y ago
  It's irregular to misrepresent a free property transfer as a non-disclosure agreement. Even signed, something like that sounds so silly that I can't imagine it being binding. When businesses do things like that, it probably only works when people are afraid. I'm not sure if it's helpful to keep insisting he lawyer up before saying "no" to an absurd ask. Nothing wrong with pushing back.
andrei_says_ 5y ago
If this is the case it could be interpreted by an IP grab under the threat of firing you.
AnimalMuppet 5y ago
Don't leave your job, but don't sign. Tell them why you're not signing - because it's ridiculously overbroad. If they fire you, you have a legal case. (Maybe - IANAL. The point is, if you quit, you have no legal case.) Another approach you could take, though - it's limited to stuff that relates to what the company does. OK, think through your prior ideas. With that limitation, are there any ideas that you care about that they could take? If not, then it's still a crummy move on their part, but it doesn't actually affect you.
NonEUCitizen 5y ago
Start interviewing again.

this is something you need to dicuss with an employment attorney. Either way, you're working with terrible people and if you feel you need to sign this to keep your job and support your family, you're being exploited. Is this in the US, in a major city?

fallingfrog 5y ago
Yes, but I'm not going to say exactly where.
- dekhn 5y ago
  OK you need to find a lawyer to get real advice immediately. You can't just dump something like this on HN and ask for advice without providing enough context for us to advise. This doesn't like a big company, so in many ways my suspicion is this is a small company with a greedy founder and lawyer and they are taking advantage of employees. If it's a large company, they should know better. If I were to handle this myself, I'd first check to see whether I was 100% convinced that I needed to keep a job to support my family, because voluntarily signining away IP rights like this is a terrible idea, even if it is legal and/or enforceble. Next, i'd evaluate whether I could get away with not signing the form. Are they making it a condition for further employment? An implied threat you'll be fired? My guess is no, it's really a bluff, they want you to sign, but if you pushed back correcftly, they'd fold. However, it's a delicate thing to do that.
- fallingfrog 5y ago
  I've only been at the company 3 days and they sent this in a mass email to everyone to sign ASAP. I'm too new to have any leverage but I've been unemployed for 3 months and I really need money.
  - jevoten 5y ago
    Consider networking with your co-workers. You may not have much leverage on your own, but you do as a group. They probably don't like that clause either. But they also might not be aware of it, or how severe it is. Make sure they know. Especially the "or anticipated future business", which is a potentially arbitrarily broad category. And make sure to point out to your co-workers that, if they sign, the company could claim any idea they have in the future is based on one they had in the past, that they signed over to the company. And that this could impact their future employment, as employers might open themselves to legal liability if this company decides to sue them, on the logic that they are benefiting from your ideas, which they own. In sum, this is a catastrophically bad contract, and the only way they'll get everyone to sign it is if your co-workers aren't aware of how bad it is. So make sure they are acutely aware.
  - cafard 5y ago
    My sister-in-law got a ridiculous non-compete during her employment at a government contractor. It was sent broadcast if not to all employees, then to many in her general area. She is a lawyer, my brother is a lawyer, and between them they drafted a non-compete she would be willing to sign. The contractor sent it out with minimal changes as the non-compete to be signed. So talk to a lawyer. I doubt you're the only person with questions.
- JPLeRouzic 5y ago
  It is possible find a text on DDG which is very similar: (a) The Employee has attached hereto, as Exhibit A, a list describing all discoveries, ideas, ... which were created,... by the Employee prior to the Employee’s employment by the Company ..., which relate ... to the ... business of the Company, and which are not assigned to the Company ... or, if no such list is attached, Employee represents that there are no Prior Developments. I am not a layer, nor even a native speaker, but it looks to me that this company does not want to steal prior ideas or inventions, but wants to protect them from future claims of ownership by an (ex) employee. So the employee has to provide a list of ideas/inventions/etc that (s)he claims as their own. Indeed I may be entirely wrong.
  - dekhn 5y ago
    The quoted text you provide is about telling a new employer about past inventions. That's standard at any big company. The text the poster quoted is a transfer of that IP. that is not standard.
fallingfrog 5y ago
It came in an email saying they need it to be signed ASAP. I feel like they should at least give me time to ask a lawyer or something.
- willcipriano 5y ago
  What is the consideration[0]? It's not employment since you are already working there and past consideration is not valid consideration. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consideration_under_American_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consideration_under_American_l...
  - codingdave 5y ago
    Some jurisdictions are ok with continued employment being consideration. Some are not. Hence the need to ask a lawyer.
    - willcipriano 5y ago
      Do you have a example of one? That would be rather exploitative. Firing someone because they refuse to accept a one sided contract where they gain nothing would work in a at will state, but you'd certainly be able to collect unemployment.
      - codingdave 5y ago
        Based on my understanding from past experience (as well as googling it just now), that is true for the majority of US states. FYI, this is a writeup I found for Wisconsin when I just searched --> https://www.littler.com/publication-press/publication/wisconsin-supreme-court-rules-continued-employment-lawful https://www.littler.com/publication-press/publication/wiscon... Contracts have no legal requirement to be fair or balanced. Consideration does need to exist, but does not need to be equitable. So yes, it is exploitative, but that does not make it illegal.
- codingdave 5y ago
  Are you already hired, as in already started work? If so, you definitely need to talk to a lawyer before signing. Putting pressure on you like that for a contract that is new, after you have started work, may have additional legal aspects - some jurisdictions do not allow that without additional compensation. IANAL, but call one before acting.

codingdave 5y ago

OK, there is another way to proceed - you could put a price on the value of your prior inventions, and ask for them to purchase those rights. Either way, this is not binding on you unless you sign it. I agree with the other comment that calling an attorney is a good idea, as is walking away from these guys. There are a lot of job opportunities out there right now.

jart 5y ago
It's irregular to misrepresent a free property transfer as a non-disclosure agreement. Even signed, something like that sounds so silly that I can't imagine it being binding. When businesses do things like that, it probably only works when people are afraid. I'm not sure if it's helpful to keep insisting he lawyer up before saying "no" to an absurd ask. Nothing wrong with pushing back.

andrei_says_ 5y ago

If this is the case it could be interpreted by an IP grab under the threat of firing you.

AnimalMuppet 5y ago

Don't leave your job, but don't sign. Tell them why you're not signing - because it's ridiculously overbroad. If they fire you, you have a legal case. (Maybe - IANAL. The point is, if you quit, you have no legal case.) Another approach you could take, though - it's limited to stuff that relates to what the company does. OK, think through your prior ideas. With that limitation, are there any ideas that you care about that they could take? If not, then it's still a crummy move on their part, but it doesn't actually affect you.

NonEUCitizen 5y ago

Start interviewing again.