4 ms·

I was wondering about the morality of using candidates' solutions in your products. Does the hiring company own the test results? Does the candidate? What if th

I was wondering about the morality of using candidates' solutions in your products. Does the hiring company own the test results? Does the candidate? What if the candidate gets hired, who owns the solution, then? The candidate does not get paid to solve the interview test, but it could be seen as a collaborative effort on both the company and the candidate, since both put time and engineering resource in it.

powersnail 5y ago
Is algorithm copyright-able? If it can be regarded as an intellectual property, does that mean that the company would be infringing on the candidate’s right?
- iampivot 5y ago
  XOR certainly was patented for use to display mouse cursors.
dijit 5y ago
It is immoral to use candidate answers in your product, assuming you don’t hire them. If you do hire them then I guess it becomes fine, but otherwise definitely immoral. The problem is that we’re fleshy meatbags and easily influenced. It’s possible we internalise answers to interview questions and then “spontaneously” come up with them later, without _knowingly_ stealing the idea. This happens sometimes in comedy, and the comedian apologises. You can usually tell the difference in comedy between plagiarism and accidental theft because the joke is delivered much differently but has the same core. It would be harder with interview answers.
- biztos 5y ago
  > If you do hire them then I guess it becomes fine Not that anything will stop companies from doing this, and not that I think it ever really happens, but for it to be morally OK I think you’d have to both get their permission and compensate them fairly. Before I work for you, my ideas are mine even if I write them on your whiteboard.
  - dijit 5y ago
    Sure, but if I ask you an interview question and your answer is good enough that I want to use it: you'll probably be the one implementing the solution. Why would I trust the answer more than the person?
    - pbhjpbhj 5y ago
      >Why would I trust the answer more than the person? // Why wouldn't you? The truth of statements is not a function of the people making them (though of course that can often be a strong indicator of truth).
- pdpi 5y ago
  If you’re hiring, and your candidate produces a solution to a real problem, and your interviewers actually want to use their solution, that person is getting an offer unless they were absolutely obnoxious and terrible to work with. Failure to do so is just bad recruitment. Or, put differently: if I’m the candidate and they end up “stealing” my solution, that’s a small price to pay to avoid working in what is likely a terrible environment.
  - foobiekr 5y ago
    That assumes the interviewer is ethical. In my experience, most people in SW do not have a strong cultural basis for ethical behavior of this sort.
chillfox 5y ago
It's not a work for hire and there is no copyright assignment so copyright will remain with the candidate. However some whiteboard scribbles are not the same as working code, so it is likely easy to make an implementation that does not infringe in most cases. Not that it really matters because it's highly unlikely that anyone is going to sue over it.
mytailorisrich 5y ago
There is no copyright on algorithms. To ask interviewees a question about an actual issue you have and see what solutions they come up with is clever. You get more input for free and you may find someone you want to hire. I don't see a problem as long as you are really looking to hire someone and not advertising fake job openings.
jakey_bakey 5y ago
The real question is, what on earth is a candidate doing in a few hours of interview processes that's worth stealing? I've had candidates use useful Python libraries that I didn't know about in tech tests before, but that's pretty much the extent to which I've learned anything helpful when recruiting
- adwww 5y ago
  About coding maybe, but I find interviewing really informative to learn about what other companies are doing and how they have architected stuff.

powersnail 5y ago

Is algorithm copyright-able? If it can be regarded as an intellectual property, does that mean that the company would be infringing on the candidate’s right?

iampivot 5y ago
XOR certainly was patented for use to display mouse cursors.

dijit 5y ago

It is immoral to use candidate answers in your product, assuming you don’t hire them. If you do hire them then I guess it becomes fine, but otherwise definitely immoral. The problem is that we’re fleshy meatbags and easily influenced. It’s possible we internalise answers to interview questions and then “spontaneously” come up with them later, without _knowingly_ stealing the idea. This happens sometimes in comedy, and the comedian apologises. You can usually tell the difference in comedy between plagiarism and accidental theft because the joke is delivered much differently but has the same core. It would be harder with interview answers.

biztos 5y ago
> If you do hire them then I guess it becomes fine Not that anything will stop companies from doing this, and not that I think it ever really happens, but for it to be morally OK I think you’d have to both get their permission and compensate them fairly. Before I work for you, my ideas are mine even if I write them on your whiteboard.
- dijit 5y ago
  Sure, but if I ask you an interview question and your answer is good enough that I want to use it: you'll probably be the one implementing the solution. Why would I trust the answer more than the person?
  - pbhjpbhj 5y ago
    >Why would I trust the answer more than the person? // Why wouldn't you? The truth of statements is not a function of the people making them (though of course that can often be a strong indicator of truth).
pdpi 5y ago
If you’re hiring, and your candidate produces a solution to a real problem, and your interviewers actually want to use their solution, that person is getting an offer unless they were absolutely obnoxious and terrible to work with. Failure to do so is just bad recruitment. Or, put differently: if I’m the candidate and they end up “stealing” my solution, that’s a small price to pay to avoid working in what is likely a terrible environment.
- foobiekr 5y ago
  That assumes the interviewer is ethical. In my experience, most people in SW do not have a strong cultural basis for ethical behavior of this sort.

chillfox 5y ago

It's not a work for hire and there is no copyright assignment so copyright will remain with the candidate. However some whiteboard scribbles are not the same as working code, so it is likely easy to make an implementation that does not infringe in most cases. Not that it really matters because it's highly unlikely that anyone is going to sue over it.

mytailorisrich 5y ago

There is no copyright on algorithms. To ask interviewees a question about an actual issue you have and see what solutions they come up with is clever. You get more input for free and you may find someone you want to hire. I don't see a problem as long as you are really looking to hire someone and not advertising fake job openings.

jakey_bakey 5y ago

The real question is, what on earth is a candidate doing in a few hours of interview processes that's worth stealing? I've had candidates use useful Python libraries that I didn't know about in tech tests before, but that's pretty much the extent to which I've learned anything helpful when recruiting

adwww 5y ago
About coding maybe, but I find interviewing really informative to learn about what other companies are doing and how they have architected stuff.