2 ms·

> "and make sure you own the open source IP you ship. " In all the juridictions I have worked in, the code I ship during my work hours is owned by my employer,

> "and make sure you own the open source IP you ship. " In all the juridictions I have worked in, the code I ship during my work hours is owned by my employer, not me. I simply just can't decide on my own to contribute during my work hours. I need a formal agreement to work on open source code, and every single time I asked for it it took so much time (months) to run through legal department that I simply gave up or another contributor had shipped a PR in the meantime so I just gave up asking.

blurbleblurble 5mo ago
I wouldn't take a job where the employer wasnt publishing permissively licensed code for all but the production bits. It's demoralizing for me and would stress my soul to the brink. I'd rather be broke.
- jagged-chisel 5mo ago
  In the US, you’d definitely be broke. There just aren’t many employers willing to deal with it. All the ones I’ve worked for just use what’s available without modification.
  - blurbleblurble 5mo ago
    I'm in the US and have made a living writing open source for almost 10 years now, through ups and downs, but it's worked out.
Aurornis 5mo ago
I think they were trying to say that you shouldn't try to commit work that is not yours to give away. There's another section down below about it, but the bullet point up top became confusing. This point is obvious to devs with more experience but has been a real problem with some junior devs at some of my companies: They see something cool the company is doing in an internal project and think it would make a great contribution to some open source project, without thinking about the problems with using their knowledge of closed-source code to submit substantially similar code (or in some cases, copy and pasting) to an open source project.
Yokohiii 5mo ago
I have never investigated, but I was under the impression that in Germany the employer owns all source code created during working hours by default. Most employers that are not IT focused wont even understand what open source is or how it works. So I guess it's hopeless for many to get permission. The linked site should probably focus on explaining benefits of open source and advocate legal guidelines for _employers_ primarily.
- Galanwe 5mo ago
  > in Germany the employer owns all source code created during working hours by default. Same in most countries I worked in. Generally it's not just the business hours, but also any kind of device used. If code got edited at one point on a company laptop, or during office hours, then it's the company's. Most intellectual jobs in quant finance will also routinely enforce an intellectual property clause in their work contract, which extends appropriation to anything resulting from the knowledge you acquired at the company. Not sure if that is enforceable in practice, but it's always there.
  - joseda-hg 5mo ago
    What would be the general stance if I for example SSH'd into something I own and worked from there? This AFAICT, isn't the case where I live, I usually have to sign something actively giving the the employer ownership (And usually it's scoped to the project), but I'm not sure if this is a formality
    - Galanwe 5mo ago
      > What would be the general stance if I for example SSH'd into something I own and worked from there? That would definitevely count as company time and company device usage.
- SyrupThinker 5mo ago
  Depends on how you frame it, the employee still owns the work in the sense that they are the copyright holder. But the employer is granted exclusive usage rights to the work, so you wouldn't have the rights to license it to someone else as is encouraged in the article. That would be relevant, for example, when the company goes defunct, and no one else holds any usage rights for the work. Then you'd regain those usage rights. That of course is iffy to make use of because you'd need to be sure that you are considered the exclusive author, and that no one else acquired these exclusive usage rights.

blurbleblurble 5mo ago

I wouldn't take a job where the employer wasnt publishing permissively licensed code for all but the production bits. It's demoralizing for me and would stress my soul to the brink. I'd rather be broke.

jagged-chisel 5mo ago
In the US, you’d definitely be broke. There just aren’t many employers willing to deal with it. All the ones I’ve worked for just use what’s available without modification.
- blurbleblurble 5mo ago
  I'm in the US and have made a living writing open source for almost 10 years now, through ups and downs, but it's worked out.

Aurornis 5mo ago

I think they were trying to say that you shouldn't try to commit work that is not yours to give away. There's another section down below about it, but the bullet point up top became confusing. This point is obvious to devs with more experience but has been a real problem with some junior devs at some of my companies: They see something cool the company is doing in an internal project and think it would make a great contribution to some open source project, without thinking about the problems with using their knowledge of closed-source code to submit substantially similar code (or in some cases, copy and pasting) to an open source project.

Yokohiii 5mo ago

I have never investigated, but I was under the impression that in Germany the employer owns all source code created during working hours by default. Most employers that are not IT focused wont even understand what open source is or how it works. So I guess it's hopeless for many to get permission. The linked site should probably focus on explaining benefits of open source and advocate legal guidelines for _employers_ primarily.

Galanwe 5mo ago
> in Germany the employer owns all source code created during working hours by default. Same in most countries I worked in. Generally it's not just the business hours, but also any kind of device used. If code got edited at one point on a company laptop, or during office hours, then it's the company's. Most intellectual jobs in quant finance will also routinely enforce an intellectual property clause in their work contract, which extends appropriation to anything resulting from the knowledge you acquired at the company. Not sure if that is enforceable in practice, but it's always there.
- joseda-hg 5mo ago
  What would be the general stance if I for example SSH'd into something I own and worked from there? This AFAICT, isn't the case where I live, I usually have to sign something actively giving the the employer ownership (And usually it's scoped to the project), but I'm not sure if this is a formality
  - Galanwe 5mo ago
    > What would be the general stance if I for example SSH'd into something I own and worked from there? That would definitevely count as company time and company device usage.
SyrupThinker 5mo ago
Depends on how you frame it, the employee still owns the work in the sense that they are the copyright holder. But the employer is granted exclusive usage rights to the work, so you wouldn't have the rights to license it to someone else as is encouraged in the article. That would be relevant, for example, when the company goes defunct, and no one else holds any usage rights for the work. Then you'd regain those usage rights. That of course is iffy to make use of because you'd need to be sure that you are considered the exclusive author, and that no one else acquired these exclusive usage rights.