3 ms·

Many consider the only way to validate is by having someone pay money for it. Lots of people (myself included) will say they will pay for something but when the

Many consider the only way to validate is by having someone pay money for it. Lots of people (myself included) will say they will pay for something but when the time comes to buy they don't. The book The Mom Test also points out well that lots of people will say your idea is good even when they have no intention of buying. They don't want to be assholes so they lie to you to make you feel good. The real question is, how often are you signing away all of your intellectual property to your employer. Honestly, I've never had that in a single contract.

Ultimatt 4y ago
Ive signed away all intellectual rights for every tech job Ive had. To the point of rediculously un enforceable like any thought I have should be written down as a letter for review and explicit inclusion/exclusion.
- onion2k 4y ago
  A long time ago (in the 90s, and in the UK) an engineer who worked with my Dad wrote a book that was something like "Hit Singles of the 1970s". The company, which made communications satellites, took him to court and claimed the IP and all the profits from it, and won. Dont assume things are unenforceable just because they sound stupid.
  - spoiler 4y ago
    Oh wow. That sounds crazy that such slave-like contracts are enforceable. Do you know what their reasoning in court was? I can't imagine the connection between these two topics (satellites and 70s music). Was it just a predatory "all you do belongs to us" type of contract? Could he have counter-sued them for... I'm not sure what, breach of human rights? Also, are there laws against abusing the legal system like this? There should be, if not
    - unity1001 4y ago
      > That sounds crazy that such slave-like contracts are enforceable That's Angloamerican common law for you. A derelict of feudal law with its hodgepodge of precedents, statues and laws that descend from medieval traditions, feudal lords' decrees and opinions. Its geared for asserting the rights of the lord.
      - psd1 4y ago
        AIUI, that's an unfair conclusion. I'm happy to be corrected, of course. tl;dr: unfair outcomes are more caused by local implementations than by the legal structure. IMO the unfairness in the American legal system comes from the expense of civil litigation, and a criminal justice system with no upper bound on how long defendants can be remanded. Those are not inherent in the English legal system. It is extremely rare for criminal defendants to be locked up for weeks before trial in England. Even Benjamin Mendy has been released to house arrest; he was denied bail but had to be released after a year. In England, there's the legal concept of "odious contract" which makes some provisions unenforceable. IDK if it would apply in this scenario but it seems at least work a punt. Precedent could work for our against; it's not a given that precedent would favour the big corp. The defining characteristic of English and American law is that it's adversarial; two parties debate before a supposedly-impartial judge, who then rules based on the evidence provided by the litigating parties. The primary alternative system, used in many European countries, is the inquisitorial system. A judge directs questioning to establish the facts as they see fit. It seems to me that, if you want to favour vested interests, you'd implement an inquisitorial system. I don't know what you'd call the alternatives to common-law, but I don't see why there's a benefit to vested interests from it. It grants the judiciary some room for interpretation of laws made by lawmakers - whom I'll warrant were landed gentry more often than not, in Western history. Historically, English law did allow serfs to challenge their landlords in court. I'm pretty sure there are cases of landlords being found guilty of dereliction of noblesse oblige. I mainly know what I remember from /r/AskHistorians though so please feel free to correct me. Serfdom was abolished in England in about the 13th century, which is also when the Magna Carta became law. I suspect that English peasants had much greater legal protections and recourses than in most other European countries in the late mediaeval period.
- __jambo 4y ago
  Which reqion and field? Trying to get a bearing how common this is. I've also seen some very aggressive contracts, even for non-tech jobs in NZ and Canada. Default template contracts can be very aggressive in this sense.

Ultimatt 4y ago

Ive signed away all intellectual rights for every tech job Ive had. To the point of rediculously un enforceable like any thought I have should be written down as a letter for review and explicit inclusion/exclusion.

onion2k 4y ago
A long time ago (in the 90s, and in the UK) an engineer who worked with my Dad wrote a book that was something like "Hit Singles of the 1970s". The company, which made communications satellites, took him to court and claimed the IP and all the profits from it, and won. Dont assume things are unenforceable just because they sound stupid.
- spoiler 4y ago
  Oh wow. That sounds crazy that such slave-like contracts are enforceable. Do you know what their reasoning in court was? I can't imagine the connection between these two topics (satellites and 70s music). Was it just a predatory "all you do belongs to us" type of contract? Could he have counter-sued them for... I'm not sure what, breach of human rights? Also, are there laws against abusing the legal system like this? There should be, if not
  - unity1001 4y ago
    > That sounds crazy that such slave-like contracts are enforceable That's Angloamerican common law for you. A derelict of feudal law with its hodgepodge of precedents, statues and laws that descend from medieval traditions, feudal lords' decrees and opinions. Its geared for asserting the rights of the lord.
    - psd1 4y ago
      AIUI, that's an unfair conclusion. I'm happy to be corrected, of course. tl;dr: unfair outcomes are more caused by local implementations than by the legal structure. IMO the unfairness in the American legal system comes from the expense of civil litigation, and a criminal justice system with no upper bound on how long defendants can be remanded. Those are not inherent in the English legal system. It is extremely rare for criminal defendants to be locked up for weeks before trial in England. Even Benjamin Mendy has been released to house arrest; he was denied bail but had to be released after a year. In England, there's the legal concept of "odious contract" which makes some provisions unenforceable. IDK if it would apply in this scenario but it seems at least work a punt. Precedent could work for our against; it's not a given that precedent would favour the big corp. The defining characteristic of English and American law is that it's adversarial; two parties debate before a supposedly-impartial judge, who then rules based on the evidence provided by the litigating parties. The primary alternative system, used in many European countries, is the inquisitorial system. A judge directs questioning to establish the facts as they see fit. It seems to me that, if you want to favour vested interests, you'd implement an inquisitorial system. I don't know what you'd call the alternatives to common-law, but I don't see why there's a benefit to vested interests from it. It grants the judiciary some room for interpretation of laws made by lawmakers - whom I'll warrant were landed gentry more often than not, in Western history. Historically, English law did allow serfs to challenge their landlords in court. I'm pretty sure there are cases of landlords being found guilty of dereliction of noblesse oblige. I mainly know what I remember from /r/AskHistorians though so please feel free to correct me. Serfdom was abolished in England in about the 13th century, which is also when the Magna Carta became law. I suspect that English peasants had much greater legal protections and recourses than in most other European countries in the late mediaeval period.
__jambo 4y ago
Which reqion and field? Trying to get a bearing how common this is. I've also seen some very aggressive contracts, even for non-tech jobs in NZ and Canada. Default template contracts can be very aggressive in this sense.