5 ms·

I work at a fortune 500 and you have to go through hoops to own anything. By letter of the contract they own all the IP we produce which legally includes photos

by j-bos 2y ago

I work at a fortune 500 and you have to go through hoops to own anything. By letter of the contract they own all the IP we produce which legally includes photos taken. Doubtful they'd enforce that, but it gives them a strong position if one were to write any useful code outside of work.

munchler 2y ago
I work for a Fortune 500 as well, FWIW.
- j-bos 2y ago
  And your employment agreement contract includes the same broad assignment clause?
  - noumuon 2y ago
    I work for a Fortune 100 company. Dystopian hell hole of out of touch executives in an amorphous blob of a company that only continues due to its massive size and momentum, gobbling up companies because they can't compete and eventually sucking the soul from them... but they only own the rights to things produced on their time or on their equipment.
jarsin 2y ago
Are you saying if you worked as a programmer in your standard fortune 500 company and wrote fiction on the weekends they own the copyright to the fiction? Would be interesting to see how it would play out if a programmers fiction blew up as big as Harry Potter or something.
- crazydoggers 2y ago
  If you utilize any of the company’s assets or property in its creation then they can argue ownership. For example if you write it on their laptop that you take home on the weekend, or you spend your lunch break at the computer in your office writing it, etc. (this will almost certainly be outlined in your employee contract) If you write it at home on your personal property during your personal time, then they have as much claim to it as the work you do on your house or the models you paint or the soap you make and sell to your friends… which is none. However, if it’s work you’re doing in the same industry, then you have to deal with non-compete clauses in your employment agreement depending on what state you live in. Edit: This is USA law as I understand it (IANAL)
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - josephg 2y ago
    Sure; but it’s a lot more ambiguous if you’re a programmer & writing code on the weekend. Especially if the code is in any way related to your work. Also whatever your contract says takes priority over the law in cases like this. Always read your employment contract carefully and clarify stuff like that if you need to. Your company doesn’t want copyright over the fanfic you’re writing on the weekend. If that matters to you, the best time to clarify it is before you sign the contract.
    - bluGill 2y ago
      Don't write code related to work on the weekend. That is unethical no matter what the law says. There is plenty of code not related to work that you can write on weekends and thus it is ethical (may or may not legally be yours but ethicaly it is)
      - crazydoggers 2y ago
        There is no way that it is unethical. According to who’s ethics? According to my ethics it’s unethical for a company to believe it has any say whatsoever about what I author unless I give them specific assignment of what I create for specific compensation. Outside of that, they can go float a boat. They hired me for my talent; and will compensate me adequately or I will provide my services elsewhere; and it’s up to me to determine what that looks like when I signed a contract with them. It sounds like the corporate lawyers have succeeded in making you think they’re doing you all the favor when you create the value for them. There’s a reason the FTC ruled against non-competes. It’s “ethically un-American”.
        bluGill 2y ago
        The work related part makes it unethical. Unless they pay you to work weekends or otherwise compensate you (on my team when you work a weekends we expect you to take time off in the near future to compensate for that time) doing something that competes with the company you work for is not ethical.
bruce511 2y ago
You miss the point completely. Let's say you take a photo and paste it on the internet. It is then used (without your permission) in a global ad campaign. Your ability to sue is zero. All the user has to do is show that you don't have standing. Your employer doesn't care. They'll happily ignore the violation. They're not interested in defending some random photo. Incidentally if you posted the photo to somewhere like Facebook, the user can buy the license to use it from Facebook instead of from you, but that's another discussion for another day.
- j-bos 2y ago
  Ha, thanks that's an excellent, and horrifying, point I had not considered, Thanks! All the same I stand by my point.
- KPGv2 2y ago
  > if you posted the photo to somewhere like Facebook, the user can buy the license to use it from Facebook instead of from you This is not true. Here is Meta's TOS: https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms/preview/?section_id=section_3 https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms/preview/?section_id=sec... > you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, and worldwide license to host, use, distribute, modify, run, copy, publicly perform or display, translate, and create derivative works of your content Notably absent from this list is the right to sublicense the content
  - saagarjha 2y ago
    Did you miss this part? > sub-licensable
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]

by j-bos 2y ago

munchler 2y ago

I work for a Fortune 500 as well, FWIW.

j-bos 2y ago
And your employment agreement contract includes the same broad assignment clause?
- noumuon 2y ago
  I work for a Fortune 100 company. Dystopian hell hole of out of touch executives in an amorphous blob of a company that only continues due to its massive size and momentum, gobbling up companies because they can't compete and eventually sucking the soul from them... but they only own the rights to things produced on their time or on their equipment.

jarsin 2y ago

Are you saying if you worked as a programmer in your standard fortune 500 company and wrote fiction on the weekends they own the copyright to the fiction? Would be interesting to see how it would play out if a programmers fiction blew up as big as Harry Potter or something.

crazydoggers 2y ago
If you utilize any of the company’s assets or property in its creation then they can argue ownership. For example if you write it on their laptop that you take home on the weekend, or you spend your lunch break at the computer in your office writing it, etc. (this will almost certainly be outlined in your employee contract) If you write it at home on your personal property during your personal time, then they have as much claim to it as the work you do on your house or the models you paint or the soap you make and sell to your friends… which is none. However, if it’s work you’re doing in the same industry, then you have to deal with non-compete clauses in your employment agreement depending on what state you live in. Edit: This is USA law as I understand it (IANAL)
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- josephg 2y ago
  Sure; but it’s a lot more ambiguous if you’re a programmer & writing code on the weekend. Especially if the code is in any way related to your work. Also whatever your contract says takes priority over the law in cases like this. Always read your employment contract carefully and clarify stuff like that if you need to. Your company doesn’t want copyright over the fanfic you’re writing on the weekend. If that matters to you, the best time to clarify it is before you sign the contract.
  - bluGill 2y ago
    Don't write code related to work on the weekend. That is unethical no matter what the law says. There is plenty of code not related to work that you can write on weekends and thus it is ethical (may or may not legally be yours but ethicaly it is)
    - crazydoggers 2y ago
      There is no way that it is unethical. According to who’s ethics? According to my ethics it’s unethical for a company to believe it has any say whatsoever about what I author unless I give them specific assignment of what I create for specific compensation. Outside of that, they can go float a boat. They hired me for my talent; and will compensate me adequately or I will provide my services elsewhere; and it’s up to me to determine what that looks like when I signed a contract with them. It sounds like the corporate lawyers have succeeded in making you think they’re doing you all the favor when you create the value for them. There’s a reason the FTC ruled against non-competes. It’s “ethically un-American”.
      - bluGill 2y ago
        The work related part makes it unethical. Unless they pay you to work weekends or otherwise compensate you (on my team when you work a weekends we expect you to take time off in the near future to compensate for that time) doing something that competes with the company you work for is not ethical.

bruce511 2y ago

You miss the point completely. Let's say you take a photo and paste it on the internet. It is then used (without your permission) in a global ad campaign. Your ability to sue is zero. All the user has to do is show that you don't have standing. Your employer doesn't care. They'll happily ignore the violation. They're not interested in defending some random photo. Incidentally if you posted the photo to somewhere like Facebook, the user can buy the license to use it from Facebook instead of from you, but that's another discussion for another day.

j-bos 2y ago
Ha, thanks that's an excellent, and horrifying, point I had not considered, Thanks! All the same I stand by my point.
KPGv2 2y ago
> if you posted the photo to somewhere like Facebook, the user can buy the license to use it from Facebook instead of from you This is not true. Here is Meta's TOS: https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms/preview/?section_id=section_3 https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms/preview/?section_id=sec... > you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, and worldwide license to host, use, distribute, modify, run, copy, publicly perform or display, translate, and create derivative works of your content Notably absent from this list is the right to sublicense the content
- saagarjha 2y ago
  Did you miss this part? > sub-licensable
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]