4 ms·

Don't just take it down. Destroy it. Make sure that any benefit your employer was receiving from it vanishes. If they claim ownership, despite the work having b

Don't just take it down. Destroy it. Make sure that any benefit your employer was receiving from it vanishes. If they claim ownership, despite the work having been done in your free time, demand the overtime pay. Make it clear that OSHA will be involved if they decline. Hardline dickery deservers to be repaid in kind. Ah: Edit still available: Destroy was the wrong word. Make inaccessible to everyone, including the employer as if erased. If the employer claims exclusive ownership you have a bargaining chip. They may own it, but they should pay for it.

nevinera 14y ago
That's not 'hardline dickery'. The company didn't get a lawyer involved and force him to take it down, they expressed concern - the author apparently agrees that it's related or similar to work he did while an employee, or there would have been a bit more argument than "oh, ok". What you're proposing would of course be fine - the company isn't claiming 'ownership' of that code, just suggesting that it might be infringing. But I don't get the impression that they're using that charting library, just similar code written by the same author. They wouldn't be hurt by that at all.
- noonespecial 14y ago
  ...my fault, should of A-OK'ed everything before putting it online. Didn't expect anywhere near that sort of reaction though. (from the author's twitter feed) Sounds kinda fierce to me. I suspect if he'd refused, lawyers wouldn't be far behind. Perhaps I'm just jaded. I've seen some pretty egregious overstepping by companies in my time. I'm still calling it a dick move. A great deal of what makes him valuable to them, he likely learned at home doing this sort of thing. He may even be driving the product's direction somewhat with his personal exploration.
  - bcj 14y ago
    Didn't Expect anywhere near that sort of reaction though I read that as reaction to the project by the public (i.e., tons of page views), not as the reaction of his employer. It's quite possible that his company was quite friendly about the issue. While it's unfortunate to lose an open-source project, there is not enough information to know whether Nick or his employer is the overstepping their bounds.
- arethuza 14y ago
  "What you're proposing would of course be fine" Not if the company are claiming ownership (even in the vaguest of ways) of the code and think there is some value in it - in that case "destroying" it could be a remarkably bad thing to do. [NB I have been involved in litigation over ownership of code and although we were 100% in the right it was an appallingly stressful experence - mostly because logic seemed to go completely out the window once things turned nasty].
  - noonespecial 14y ago
    Destroy might not mean quite what I'd hoped in this context. I more meant make completely inaccesible to everyone. If the employer claims exclusive ownership, require the overtime pay before you allow them to benefit from it again. No matter what you signed as an employee, OSHA(1) has rules about how long you are required to work without overtime. Its a clever end run I've seen used around "we own everything you do at any time" BS that employment contracts often have in them. Yes, they may own it, but they will have to pay for the time taken to create it. Usually when faced with a big bill, thy decided it wasn't so important to own it after all. (1) Sorry, that was dumb. OSHA just enforces some of these rules. The rules are actually The Fair Labor Standards Act.
  - nevinera 14y ago
    I am only guessing from the contents of the post, but it sounds like they were asserting possible infringement against his own previous work, not ownership of the library he developed on his own time. It is best to be careful though, I much agree. They'd have a tough time proving ownership of that code unless he was also using it in one of their applications, but that crap can get very complicated.
aneth4 14y ago
Overtime doesn't apply to white collar workers. I've not heard of OSHA being involved in employer IP issues, nor in any software engineering environment. Destroying something the company claims as their IP would subject someone to some serious criminal and civil liability. Also, if the guy didn't like his job, he'd probably find another one. I get the sense he wants to keep this one and maintain a civil employment.
- noonespecial 14y ago
  >Overtime doesn't apply to white collar workers. Not necessarily true. Its a big can of worms that I suspect an employer might not want to pry open. http://www.flsa.com/overtime.html http://www.flsa.com/overtime.html http://www.flsa.com/computer.html http://www.flsa.com/computer.html
  - grabeh 14y ago
    More importantly, this is UK-based employment, and consequently, unless specifically available in the contract, overtime would not generally be available in this scenario.
- rmc 14y ago
  Overtime doesn't apply to white collar workers. Maybe in places like USA which has very poor employment law. However in the EU there isn't really that distinction, and employment law applies to all employees.
- jetti 14y ago
  >Overtime doesn't apply to white collar workers. Not true. Software developers are mostly exempt, but there are some that will be non-exempt from overtime based on their salary. If the person makes less than $455 a week as salaried or less than $27.63 an hour as an hourly employeed then they will be non-exempt (http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/fairpay/fs17e_computer.htm). However, I have a feeling it would be hard to find somebody paid at that rate.
  - aneth4 14y ago
readme 14y ago
Oh man, that is some serious proliterian rage. I have to wonder: why is it that someone thinks they can retroactively demand overtime pay for work that wasn't agreed in advance? As a contractor, I really don't understand this attitude.
- noonespecial 14y ago
  why is it that someone thinks they can retroactively demand overtime pay for work that wasn't agreed in advance They shouldn't. They then also have no duty to supply that work free of charge to someone who never agreed to its creation. (Which is what he was willing to give by open sourcing it btw)
- stdbrouw 14y ago
  If they want it, they pay. If they don't want it, don't pay, but don't get it either. Isn't that how you work as a contractor too? And doesn't that apply regardless of whether the work was agreed on in advance?
  - readme 14y ago
    The suggestion in the post I was replying to was to involve osha and demand overtime pay for work previously done in spare time. So no. The agreements the OP had with his company are irrelevant to his work hours. If OP did open source work on his free time, then later is asked by his company to take down said work, and complies, he is not entitled to any compensation, other than what his employer voluntarily offers him.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
    - readme 14y ago
      I'm not sure why this got downvoted, perhaps you're all missing the point: It's not that I don't like open source. I contribute to it myself. The point is that when you agree to something, that is binding.
    - 14y ago
rmc 14y ago
Make it clear that OSHA will be involved if they decline. I'm not sure, but I think the author lives in the UK. OSHA appears to be some USA thing. But this is good for the author. The EU has better employee law.
evan_ 14y ago
OP is apparently in South Africa according to his twitter profile
DannyBee 14y ago
Note: If the employer actually has a claim to it, destroying it would be a very bad idea.

nevinera 14y ago

That's not 'hardline dickery'. The company didn't get a lawyer involved and force him to take it down, they expressed concern - the author apparently agrees that it's related or similar to work he did while an employee, or there would have been a bit more argument than "oh, ok". What you're proposing would of course be fine - the company isn't claiming 'ownership' of that code, just suggesting that it might be infringing. But I don't get the impression that they're using that charting library, just similar code written by the same author. They wouldn't be hurt by that at all.

noonespecial 14y ago
...my fault, should of A-OK'ed everything before putting it online. Didn't expect anywhere near that sort of reaction though. (from the author's twitter feed) Sounds kinda fierce to me. I suspect if he'd refused, lawyers wouldn't be far behind. Perhaps I'm just jaded. I've seen some pretty egregious overstepping by companies in my time. I'm still calling it a dick move. A great deal of what makes him valuable to them, he likely learned at home doing this sort of thing. He may even be driving the product's direction somewhat with his personal exploration.
- bcj 14y ago
  Didn't Expect anywhere near that sort of reaction though I read that as reaction to the project by the public (i.e., tons of page views), not as the reaction of his employer. It's quite possible that his company was quite friendly about the issue. While it's unfortunate to lose an open-source project, there is not enough information to know whether Nick or his employer is the overstepping their bounds.
arethuza 14y ago
"What you're proposing would of course be fine" Not if the company are claiming ownership (even in the vaguest of ways) of the code and think there is some value in it - in that case "destroying" it could be a remarkably bad thing to do. [NB I have been involved in litigation over ownership of code and although we were 100% in the right it was an appallingly stressful experence - mostly because logic seemed to go completely out the window once things turned nasty].
- noonespecial 14y ago
  Destroy might not mean quite what I'd hoped in this context. I more meant make completely inaccesible to everyone. If the employer claims exclusive ownership, require the overtime pay before you allow them to benefit from it again. No matter what you signed as an employee, OSHA(1) has rules about how long you are required to work without overtime. Its a clever end run I've seen used around "we own everything you do at any time" BS that employment contracts often have in them. Yes, they may own it, but they will have to pay for the time taken to create it. Usually when faced with a big bill, thy decided it wasn't so important to own it after all. (1) Sorry, that was dumb. OSHA just enforces some of these rules. The rules are actually The Fair Labor Standards Act.
- nevinera 14y ago
  I am only guessing from the contents of the post, but it sounds like they were asserting possible infringement against his own previous work, not ownership of the library he developed on his own time. It is best to be careful though, I much agree. They'd have a tough time proving ownership of that code unless he was also using it in one of their applications, but that crap can get very complicated.

aneth4 14y ago

Overtime doesn't apply to white collar workers. I've not heard of OSHA being involved in employer IP issues, nor in any software engineering environment. Destroying something the company claims as their IP would subject someone to some serious criminal and civil liability. Also, if the guy didn't like his job, he'd probably find another one. I get the sense he wants to keep this one and maintain a civil employment.

noonespecial 14y ago
>Overtime doesn't apply to white collar workers. Not necessarily true. Its a big can of worms that I suspect an employer might not want to pry open. http://www.flsa.com/overtime.html http://www.flsa.com/overtime.html http://www.flsa.com/computer.html http://www.flsa.com/computer.html
- grabeh 14y ago
  More importantly, this is UK-based employment, and consequently, unless specifically available in the contract, overtime would not generally be available in this scenario.
rmc 14y ago
Overtime doesn't apply to white collar workers. Maybe in places like USA which has very poor employment law. However in the EU there isn't really that distinction, and employment law applies to all employees.
jetti 14y ago
>Overtime doesn't apply to white collar workers. Not true. Software developers are mostly exempt, but there are some that will be non-exempt from overtime based on their salary. If the person makes less than $455 a week as salaried or less than $27.63 an hour as an hourly employeed then they will be non-exempt (http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/fairpay/fs17e_computer.htm). However, I have a feeling it would be hard to find somebody paid at that rate.
- aneth4 14y ago

readme 14y ago

Oh man, that is some serious proliterian rage. I have to wonder: why is it that someone thinks they can retroactively demand overtime pay for work that wasn't agreed in advance? As a contractor, I really don't understand this attitude.

noonespecial 14y ago
why is it that someone thinks they can retroactively demand overtime pay for work that wasn't agreed in advance They shouldn't. They then also have no duty to supply that work free of charge to someone who never agreed to its creation. (Which is what he was willing to give by open sourcing it btw)
stdbrouw 14y ago
If they want it, they pay. If they don't want it, don't pay, but don't get it either. Isn't that how you work as a contractor too? And doesn't that apply regardless of whether the work was agreed on in advance?
- readme 14y ago
  The suggestion in the post I was replying to was to involve osha and demand overtime pay for work previously done in spare time. So no. The agreements the OP had with his company are irrelevant to his work hours. If OP did open source work on his free time, then later is asked by his company to take down said work, and complies, he is not entitled to any compensation, other than what his employer voluntarily offers him.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - readme 14y ago
    I'm not sure why this got downvoted, perhaps you're all missing the point: It's not that I don't like open source. I contribute to it myself. The point is that when you agree to something, that is binding.
  - 14y ago

rmc 14y ago

Make it clear that OSHA will be involved if they decline. I'm not sure, but I think the author lives in the UK. OSHA appears to be some USA thing. But this is good for the author. The EU has better employee law.

evan_ 14y ago

OP is apparently in South Africa according to his twitter profile

DannyBee 14y ago

Note: If the employer actually has a claim to it, destroying it would be a very bad idea.