9 ms·

For those of you who want the short version of his story, the OP wrote a password-protected program on company time that automated his data entry, and because h

• ktizo 14y ago
  They have all the property, the password will be encoded in the software. Writing it down for them is work and he was no longer working for them.
  • eggbrain 14y ago
    So if I buy a safe secretly with the company credit card, and fill it with material I completed on company time, and they fire me, I'm not legally obligated to tell them the combination to the safe?
    • ktizo 14y ago
      If your job was securing their stuff, which was before in piles on the grass outside the offices and they fire you for putting it in a safe instead, then probably not. You haven't stolen anything and they fired you for doing your job too well. All safes are openable and they opted for the hard way when they fired you. Would probably depend on the court though.
    • ensignavenger 14y ago
      The fact that you did it "secretly" might get you into trouble- using a company credit card for unauthorized purchases is fraud. I suppose you could argue the kid defrauded the company by spending his time programming rather than doing data entry. I don't think that would be as easy to get a judgement for as credit card fraud.
• vonmoltke 14y ago
  > Perhaps I have a negative view of companies as well, but when he said he programmed it on company time, and wouldn't give up the password, I was surprised that the company didn't just sue him for not giving up company property. > He told his boss, who fired him, but then the boss and manager asked for the password to the program. OP refused, called up the boss's boss, OP was brought in to talk, and given a new job as a software engineer. He didn't refuse to give the password to the company, just to his scumbag ex-boss.
  • eggbrain 14y ago
    I didn't add it to the short version, but in the second paragraph the op says: I get a call from my bosses boss ....but I was hellbent on refusing to give out the password. So he refused to give it to his boss, his manager, and his bosses boss (who in the end gave him the job).
    • vonmoltke 14y ago
      Ah, I missed that in my skimming of the OP. That does make the situation somewhat extortionary.
      • sounds 14y ago
        Oh, give him a break. He's a kid. He got his (manual data-entry) work done. Yes, legally he developed a program on company time and on company computers. But he's not being willfully extortionary just because he thought ahead and won't let scumbag boss take all the credit.
      • deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
    • lobo_tuerto 14y ago
      More context can't hurt: "...but I was hellbent on refusing to give out the password. Not to be mean/defensive, but the code was not designed for anyone to use, it was very primitive in the way it had to be setup. I didn't want to be liable for someone using it incorrectly."
• ensignavenger 14y ago
  Would the kid's knowledge about how to operate the program (in this case, a password) be considered company property? I don't think many jurisdictions would consider an employee's knowledge the property of the company, unless it was a trade secret- and even then, he would only be restricted from telling others under certain circumstances- I don't think he would be required to spend his own time (he was fired) telling the company how to operate the program. Of course, I am not a lawyer...
  • eggbrain 14y ago
    Let's say I'm a system administrator in charge of all my company's servers. I find out I'm about to get fired, and I decide to give myself the only admin privileges on these servers (that control databases, production code, etc). I'm then fired -- does the whole company go under because I can willfully refuse to give up the passwords for the admin accounts? Now granted, the code he refused to give the password to was not at all vital to the company's continued functioning, but I would assume that all work related to the functioning of the company, produced on company time, should be disseminatable. As in, once they fire me, I don't need to tell them how a script works, or what "use the d-factor automization" comment means, but someone should be able to read it, and perhaps with some effort, get an idea of what it does (so that the employee cannot add a keylogger to the system, or some other malevolent purpose).
    • Goladus 14y ago
      * I find out I'm about to get fired, and I decide to give myself the only admin privileges on these servers (that control databases, production code, etc). I'm then fired -- does the whole company go under because I can willfully refuse to give up the passwords for the admin accounts?* They will sue you and since it's likely you can be shown to have acted with malicious intent courts won't be sympathetic.
      • ruswick 14y ago
        Is that not what the kid did, just after getting fired?
• gk1 14y ago
  Some times things just fall in place. It behooves the company to bring him in for a chat and re-hire him, rather than immediately start a lengthy court process that would cost them money, time, and wouldn't even guarantee anything. Also, as this is (presumably) in the Netherlands, they don't have the same itchy trigger finger as we do in the States when it comes to filing suits.
  • azar1 14y ago
    They don't speak Dutch in Denmark.
    • gk1 14y ago
      Corrected, thank you.
    • z92 14y ago
      TIL. Thanks:-)
  • aes256 14y ago
    > Also, as this is (presumably) in Denmark, they don't have the same itchy trigger finger as we do in the States when it comes to filing suits. Surely you mean the Netherlands?
    • gk1 14y ago
      That's what I meant, thanks.
    • MartinCron 14y ago
      This trends pretty far off-topic, but Denmark is an interesting case, in that it's very, very easy to fire someone, but there is a very strong social safety net (we're talking years of unemployment benefits) which creates a pretty distinct environment for hiring and firing. Contrast that to most of the rest of Europe, where companies are reluctant to hire because it's so difficult to fire people. Any Danes out there care to elaborate or correct my misunderstanding?
• damoncali 14y ago
  Perhaps I'm just getting old, but my BS detector is pegged.
• gte910h 14y ago
  It is Europe. It may have not been theirs to take via the courts. I do remember him asking about the program back before he told his boss, and I am not surprised the way it turned out
• Jun8 14y ago
  I'm guessing he wasn't working in the US (boss speaking Dutch, etc.), if he were to try to pull that "I'm not giving you the password" thing here, he could've got a visit from FBI and/or/most probably face jail time if the company cast his program as a type of virus (i.e. any unauthorized software on their system) and complained.
  • elliottcarlson 14y ago
    Not exactly the same scenario - but at the end of 2001 I worked at a company that went under - our parent company decided to close our doors, fire everyone in one shot and then didn't pay us our final paychecks. About 4 to 6 weeks later I get a call asking for the server passwords as I was the only one with them - I refused to hand the passwords over until all of us got paid. We all had paychecks within a few days and I released the servers to them.
• exim 14y ago
  He was paid by the company to enter the data. The company owns only the data, not the mechanics (fingers, software, etc..).
  • enjo 14y ago
    In most countries (I'm not familiar with Dutch law), including the two I've worked with in the EU, the company would most definitely still own the code he wrote using company resources and on company time.
    • stfu 14y ago
      How is it best to avoid issues like these without having to get approval by a 3rd party? Is coding it at home and sending it to one's office email address enough for documentation that it was done in non-office time?
      • snookca 14y ago
        It's not even a matter of developing it on non-office hours using non-office equipment. Clauses are usually more broad to stop someone from creating a competing product, even when not on company time. Having built an app designed specifically for company systems, the company would likely have a legal claim against the invention, even if it were developed outside of office hours.
        • stfu 14y ago
          I can see that problem for a situation where the outcome turns into a marketable product. But in these automatization cases it looks more to me like when somebody running a horse-drawn carriages business starts suing an employee for working in his free time on developing a car. The skills by the employee applied to solve the problem seem often unrelated/overqualified for the reason they were hired.
    • ig1 14y ago
      Probably not unless his contract was written in such a way. If for example you wrote a personal email using a company computer while at work, you would still own all the rights to it. Your work contract will specifically say what rights you assign to your employer and the specific works it covers.
• flogic 14y ago
  The password part is a bit silly. You don't even need to do that. Just leave it rough around the edges and give people a technical description of how to use the tool. I've done that accidentally a number of times. It's amazing how many times, people just give up without even trying.
  • randomdata 14y ago
    I wonder if the story would have turned out the same without the password? It seems like the password may have created a mystery that prompted them to want to see what's inside. If it simply worked poorly/not at all without a trained operator, it likely would have been thrown away instead.
  • Evernoob 14y ago
    He states thought that the boss who fired him called later to demand the password. A somewhat likely motive for this was so he could utilise the code for himself, fire a bunch of the workers and then claim the credit for the productivity bump and cost savings. I'd rather not make life easier for such people. What this kid did turned out to be a win. The only puzzling aspect of this story is why he took the same money back. He has demonstrated value far beyond his pay grade and was hired back at the same compensation as before. Why?
    • aptwebapps 14y ago
      The same base plus the performance-linked bonus he was getting for doing most of the data entry with his program. It came to more than what his old boss was making, so it wasn't just data-entry wages.
      • tamersalama 14y ago
        This doesn't consider the value he's creating for the company. Apparently, the company was willing to part with that money already (before the improvement) - so clearly they should have offered him more for the automation.
• weaksauce 14y ago
  He's speaking Dutch so ip laws might be different enough over there that it's his property unless he gives them it explicitly.
  • nakkiel 14y ago
    Company time = company property, even in the Netherlands. In fact I don't know of a single country where it's not the case; even more so when talking about developed countries.
    • sophacles 14y ago
      Tangent - remember this when reconciling claims of "protecting creators" from those that want stronger IP.
    • ig1 14y ago
      No: http://www.sutherland.com/files/Publication/803e946d-83fe-4f38-8eaa-ec2fbf9b3782/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/11e6c1f9-66f4-4151-b480-251781227c39/WorkforHireLaws.pdf http://www.sutherland.com/files/Publication/803e946d-83fe-4f...
      • GFischer 14y ago
        Interesting. nakkiel would be right if it had been in the U.S. or here in Uruguay. From what I'm reading, that is the case in the Netherlands, the company has the right to the work: http://www.biolegis.com/uploads/tx_articles/Who_owns_IP-olanda.pdf http://www.biolegis.com/uploads/tx_articles/Who_owns_IP-olan... "In principle the person/legal entity that has created the work (such as software), is the owner of the copyrights in that work. However, article 7 of the Copyright Act provides that if the invention is made by an employee, the employer is entitled to the copyrights." Here's an apparent example from the Netherlands: http://www.futureofcopyright.com/home/blog-post/2011/03/05/wizkid-develops-new-software-at-home-but-employer-gets-the-copyrights.html http://www.futureofcopyright.com/home/blog-post/2011/03/05/w...
• samstave 14y ago
  Just because a company demands a password, sometimes it is not the right thing to do.
• rprasad 14y ago
  I agree. this story plays out exactly like every teenage coder's wet dream. It's got everything: persecution, vindication, crap boss who for some reason gets fired for firing the teenager (in the real world, firing someone who refused to turn over company property is not a reason to get fired), teenager saves everyone else's jobs, and even gets a promotion to a much better job. This kid apparently also has insane negotiation skills, and somehow managed to negotiate his own salary increase and salary increases for everyone else around him. All this, in a month... We'll probably see an update in the next day or two that this story was a hoax. UPDATE: More evidence of a hoax: the kid was making more money in an entry-level data-entry position than a manager-level employee in the company. And that entry-level data-entry position paid substantial bonsuses (which is the alleged reason the kid was making more than his manager.) And on top of all that, the boss was not eligible for bonuses bases on the productivity of his supervisees. Finally, the kid is now apparently the lead programmer in his own frigging department but somehow does not have the authority to change his desk chair. Yeah, that's all completely believable.
  • smallegan 14y ago
    I was under the impression the boss had fired him and then asked for the password.
    • rprasad 14y ago
      That would be standard operating procedure. The kid's program (if it really exists) would be company property, and his failure to turn over the password could result in civil litigation (or potentially, but unlikely) criminal prosecution.
      • tijs 14y ago
        Luckily all of this happened, i think i believe it did, in The Netherlands where litigation over this sort of thing is just not very common. Especially in smaller companies as this one seems to be.
      • Daniel_Newby 14y ago
• juan_juarez 14y ago
  If he was hired for data entry, his employment agreement might not have specified ownership of the program.
• ebbv 14y ago
  I agree with you, and am 100% sure it's bullshit. There's no details, not just identifying information, but details like where did he learn to program? What language did he use? etc. Like most popular threads on Reddit about something incredible someone did, it's obviously completely fabricated.
  • mertd 14y ago
    and if my memory serves me right, the bonuses were allegedly allocated based on how accurate the data entry job is. Um, how do you validate that without knowing the answer? Conversely, if you have the answer, why do you need data entry monkeys? Further, if this is a trivial batch script, why don't they grab a random programmer off the street, describe the problem and live happily ever after.
    • mncolinlee 14y ago
      Okay, this is clearly a comment by someone who's never worked a low-tech job. You validate correct data-entry by testing samples. I worked a job back in high school where they spent months editing Excel spreadsheets full of data only to pass the edits to me as handwritten changes to printed pages. The stacks of spreadsheet pages I was given were meters high. Since the human-made edits met simple patterns, I was able to write Excel macros to describe and perform them. I finished a week worth of work in one hour. In my case, they saw me reading a book and got irate even though the work was done and correct. I was a contractor, so they just asked me to go home early and collect fewer hours. I got paid less for working faster.
      • dserodio 14y ago
        That's exactly why contractors are usually not efficient: being more efficient means earning less
  • beedogs 14y ago
    Right. Because someone would spend two months crafting an elaborate hoax so they can trade their reddit karma for valuable cash and prizes. It all makes perfect sense. I am so tired of this Internet Detective Agency bullshit.
• SkyMarshal 14y ago
  >I was surprised that the company didn't just sue him for not giving up company property. That probably would have required escalation to Corporate Counsel and CEO, which would have exposed the fact that the manager fired the kid for doing awesome work and was likely trying to get the password to run the system himself, fire the other data-entry people, and take credit for the amazing efficiency improvements. He probably didn't want the CEO to find out about that, so he couldn't sue.
• sbov 14y ago
  What are the laws like about things produced on company time anyways? In particular, is it a two way street? In other words, what if they don't want what you produced on company time - are they obligated to take it and find a way to dispose of it?
• Gormo 14y ago
  > I was surprised that the company didn't just sue him for not giving up company property. Perhaps the executives of the company weren't knee-jerkingly litigious idiots, and realized that their money would be better spent improving their operational efficiencies than paying their lawyers to acquire a metaphorical bucket of water while the tap from which it came runs permanently dry. Litigation is expensive, and sane businesspeople don't casually file lawsuits that deliver no strategic value to their companies. No matter how legally valid the argument may be that the code is company property, the fact remains that the code wasn't the product of 'company time'; it was the product of skill, creativity, and initiative whose benefits the company clearly does not and cannot have without the willing cooperation of this individual. Why make enemies when you can make friends?
• Mvandenbergh 14y ago
  It's probably relevant that the company was in the Netherlands, not in the US. In my experience Dutch companies are much, much more reluctant to sue than American companies. Even though under Dutch law as under American law it would probably come out in their favour (I say probably because his boss fired him for writing the program on company time, if the company afterwards claims that this was work for hire rather than abuse of company time then they may have screwed themselves on the legality of the firing). I'm also skeptical of such a perfect story, but the company not suing is not such a red flag to me.
• latj 14y ago
  Are you from the U.S.? I am, and also had a hard time believing this story when I heard coworkers talking about it. Then I realized this guy is from Netherlands. This is a much more believable story set in NL.
• tripzilch 14y ago
  > Perhaps I have a negative view of companies as well, but > when he said he programmed it on company time, and wouldn't > give up the password, I was surprised that the company > didn't just sue him for not giving up company property. When I read that part, I realized I'm quite lucky I took a course on the basics of Dutch IP laws, in particular those pertaining to software and digital rights. If he wrote it on company time, it just means that the copyright of the program belongs to the company. I'm not aware of any law stating he should give up a password though. Copyright just gives one the rights to reproduce and make public a work. It does not give a copyright-holder the right to demand a copy of the work from whoever has a copy. I wonder how he passworded it. The exact way might make some difference. I assume it was a scripting language, so I guess he put the script in a passworded ZIP-file that he unpacked every time he needed it? Any other way would be easily circumvented by reading the code. I agree it is a very strange story. Not very unlikely, just strange. Also strange that nobody else got the idea this data-entry might be automated.