5 ms·

In fairness, these kinds of "anything you work on belongs to us, whether or not it's related to your work" contracts are not ethical; they aren't things that an

In fairness, these kinds of "anything you work on belongs to us, whether or not it's related to your work" contracts are not ethical; they aren't things that an ethical, honest corporation would participate in.

ryandrake 4y ago
Every company I've worked for in the past 12 years has had a clause like that in the employment agreement. The companies were otherwise ethical, but it seems like more and more of them are adopting this boilerplate. This is in CA where clauses like this are getting more difficult to enforce, but if the company can make an argument that your side project is somehow related to their current or expected future business, they can ruin your day in court even in CA.
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  Yeah, I agree that they're common and that the companies that use them are probably "otherwise ethical" (although I think our ethical standards for businesses are tragically low).
jlbbellefeuille 4y ago
Also non-enforceable in California
onemoresoop 4y ago
So if hold a job and are painter in your spare time does the corp owns your paintings as well? This is hilariously abusive
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  That is what these corporations would allege, although I don't know how well these contracts hold up in court and in reality most corporations aren't going to sue or fire you if you sell your paintings or whatever. But yeah, it's still pretty shitty.
Meph504 4y ago
These are very common, and a lot of it has to do with avoiding the complex situation of taking work related research or knowledge and saying "oh I did it in my own time." I'm not advocating this is right, or ethical, but saying that it would be an understandable precaution. The statement, and requirements are made up front, and there are no surprises for either party.
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  I don't think anyone disputes that companies are doing this as a precaution nor that it's common practice. It's "understandable" in that we've become conditioned to expect corporations to ignore ethics or morals in service of their bottom line ("What do you expect them to do? They have a 'fiduciary responsibility' to their shareholders!"). In general, I think it's absurd to claim all employees' work just to protect against niche cases, and I would like to see this practice (and similar practices) outlawed.

ryandrake 4y ago

Every company I've worked for in the past 12 years has had a clause like that in the employment agreement. The companies were otherwise ethical, but it seems like more and more of them are adopting this boilerplate. This is in CA where clauses like this are getting more difficult to enforce, but if the company can make an argument that your side project is somehow related to their current or expected future business, they can ruin your day in court even in CA.

throwaway894345 4y ago
Yeah, I agree that they're common and that the companies that use them are probably "otherwise ethical" (although I think our ethical standards for businesses are tragically low).

jlbbellefeuille 4y ago

Also non-enforceable in California

onemoresoop 4y ago

So if hold a job and are painter in your spare time does the corp owns your paintings as well? This is hilariously abusive

throwaway894345 4y ago
That is what these corporations would allege, although I don't know how well these contracts hold up in court and in reality most corporations aren't going to sue or fire you if you sell your paintings or whatever. But yeah, it's still pretty shitty.

Meph504 4y ago

These are very common, and a lot of it has to do with avoiding the complex situation of taking work related research or knowledge and saying "oh I did it in my own time." I'm not advocating this is right, or ethical, but saying that it would be an understandable precaution. The statement, and requirements are made up front, and there are no surprises for either party.

throwaway894345 4y ago
I don't think anyone disputes that companies are doing this as a precaution nor that it's common practice. It's "understandable" in that we've become conditioned to expect corporations to ignore ethics or morals in service of their bottom line ("What do you expect them to do? They have a 'fiduciary responsibility' to their shareholders!"). In general, I think it's absurd to claim all employees' work just to protect against niche cases, and I would like to see this practice (and similar practices) outlawed.