"Stealing" from the company?
-
My understanding is that those types of clauses are pretty much unenforceable here in Australia under anti-competitive laws... Once you stop working for a company your obligation to them ceases. Unless they want to pay you until the expiry of the no work clause!!
Quad skating his way through the world since the early 80's... Booger Mobile - My bright green 1964 Ford Falcon - check out the blog here!! | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!
_Damian S_ wrote:
My understanding is that those types of clauses are pretty much unenforceable here in Australia
Same goes for the Netherlands, but an employer can try... ;)
-
So a carpenter is only allowed to build one table, one chair when it's for hire and can't go home and build the same exact chair and table using his own materials? No, that would be obtuse. Of course you can recreate the same code on your own time using your own materials. But for your safety I'd suggest renaming classes & methods, etc. But, you could also ask permission to use the libraries.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einsteinahmed zahmed wrote:
No, that would be obtuse.
Except the law is not about absolutes. Rather it is about how reasonable something is. So if you do in fact create exactly the same thing then it would be up to the judge/jury to decide it if is "reasonable" if the code you created actually appears to be something that you created fresh or it a copy that you attempted to obfuscate to look different. This of course precludes any existing agreements that states that one can't even work in the same area (regardless of when or how one does it.)
ahmed zahmed wrote:
But for your safety I'd suggest renaming classes & methods, etc.
Not sure what that comment means. But taking existing code and renaming it is copying. And a reasonable interpretation would be that you had done just that.
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
Their attitude was that they don't pay developers by the hour; they pay by the month, so anything you did during that month was theirs!
They pay for x hours per month, so anything produced in those x hours can be theirs. What I do outside office hours is none of their business though!
OriginalGriff wrote:
I did ask if I should take a plastic bag with me on bathroom visits, but just got a stern look... :laugh:
:laugh: Doesn't sound like a company I would want to be working for... :~
Sander Rossel wrote:
What I do outside office hours is none of their business though!
That isn't true even in a general way. Certainly not in the US and probably most everywhere else as well. Lets go through the reasonable cases. - You commit a felony hate crime Saturday night and the press come knocking at your work to ask about you on Monday. You get fired right then. - You have a written contract with an company, you are not even an employee, but the contract states that any work in the financial industry belongs to them (any work, any time) and further there is a morals clause that specifically allows them to terminate you if you commit any serious crime. And you fail to meet one or both. And the unreasonable ones. - Drugs. You do something Saturday nite and get tested Monday. And you are fired Tuesday for drug use. - The boss doesn't like you much but keeps you around because he isn't much of a manager, but he did see you on a date with his daughter on Saturday night - so you get fired Saturday. - You write a letter to the newspaper that gets published on sunday but expressing a political view opposite that of your boss, and you get fired Monday. - You get a tattoo on Saturday because you have been cancer free for 10 years. You boss doesn't like tattoos, so...
-
BobJanova wrote:
That's only true if the idea is patented.
That is simplistic. If in fact you do start from scratch and write something similar then, at least in some cases, you are allowed to do that. It depends on implicit and explicit contracts where one is. However that doesn't stop legal challenges. And in such cases one side will attempt to show that it is a copy (modified or not) and the other will attempt to show it isn't. Neither is a sure thing. Given that and presuming that that one really did re-write it then, legally, one can only hope that what one created would be deemed significantly different enough that it would be ruled unique. But at best that is risky.
-
ahmed zahmed wrote:
No, that would be obtuse.
Except the law is not about absolutes. Rather it is about how reasonable something is. So if you do in fact create exactly the same thing then it would be up to the judge/jury to decide it if is "reasonable" if the code you created actually appears to be something that you created fresh or it a copy that you attempted to obfuscate to look different. This of course precludes any existing agreements that states that one can't even work in the same area (regardless of when or how one does it.)
ahmed zahmed wrote:
But for your safety I'd suggest renaming classes & methods, etc.
Not sure what that comment means. But taking existing code and renaming it is copying. And a reasonable interpretation would be that you had done just that.
Sure, but it's also reasonable that the ideas one uses to do one's work are also able to be used for your own benefit outside of work.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein -
Sander Rossel wrote:
What I do outside office hours is none of their business though!
That isn't true even in a general way. Certainly not in the US and probably most everywhere else as well. Lets go through the reasonable cases. - You commit a felony hate crime Saturday night and the press come knocking at your work to ask about you on Monday. You get fired right then. - You have a written contract with an company, you are not even an employee, but the contract states that any work in the financial industry belongs to them (any work, any time) and further there is a morals clause that specifically allows them to terminate you if you commit any serious crime. And you fail to meet one or both. And the unreasonable ones. - Drugs. You do something Saturday nite and get tested Monday. And you are fired Tuesday for drug use. - The boss doesn't like you much but keeps you around because he isn't much of a manager, but he did see you on a date with his daughter on Saturday night - so you get fired Saturday. - You write a letter to the newspaper that gets published on sunday but expressing a political view opposite that of your boss, and you get fired Monday. - You get a tattoo on Saturday because you have been cancer free for 10 years. You boss doesn't like tattoos, so...
Yeah, I already commented somewhere that anything you do in your private time, but influences your boss' time is your boss' business. Most of what you say doesn't hold true in the Netherlands though. You need a VERY good reason to fire an employee, getting a tattoo or not getting along is no good reason... If you really want to fire an employee (especially when he's been with the company for some time) you better start building a dossier and document every reason to fire that employee. All of them added up might be a good reason, although it's probably still going to cost you a lot of money to have him fired. If you own a small company with little profit a bad employee can literally ruin you and there's little you can do... My dad's employer has a few employees who have been sick for at least two years (you know, they do some lifting and strain their back or something) and they're still paying for those people (they can't be fired). Things work a little different here than in America :) / :-( (sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse) ;)
-
Most of the companies I have worked for cover that in the contract of employment: they own the rights to everything you produce while working for them - and one or two contracts have gone further and claimed ownership of everything produced while employed by them: which covers time outside working hours as well, but that is probably difficult to enforce in a court. Lawyers would enjoy the profits of trying though. If you are at work when you do any work on them, they own it. Taking it home without permission would be theft and could be enforced pretty easily: if it came to court, you'd almost certainly lose. On good terms with your boss? Explain and ask him for permission!
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952) Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
IBM and another company I worked for once had this provision, but it was eventually admitted and tested in a court case that such claim of ownership of what the employee does on his own time and with his own equipment is invalid.
-
CodeBubba wrote:
which is actually a very generous way to write it from their end. They don't mind me creating things on my own, just not stuff that will cut into their business.
Why would they mind and why is that generous? I call it common sense and courtesy ;) Besides, any knowledge you get at home developing your own projects you take to work where it will probably benefit your employer.
Yeah, I agree. I meant "generous" in the sense that most employee agreements I've seen just flatly state that anything you invent while in their employ is theirs. Potato, Potatoh. -b
-
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
If you create the libraries on the company time, chances are that they own them.
Probably. Would they own the ideas of the libraries as well? I could easily re-create the libraries at home.
"Ideas" are NOT patentable ... only HOW they are implemented. You cannot patent a "light bulb" (though a "patent troll" might try) ... tungsten wire vs halogen vs sodium vs mercury, etc ... that's something different. There is always room for a better mouse trap. Renaming class names, variables, etc. won't help you ... courts will look at "code patterns" at the "byte code" or machine level to make a determination if a copyright was violated. The same "constants" in a program can make this particularly easy. Of course, "experts" will always need to be brought in.
-
Suppose I created some libraries at work that we use thoroughly because they are awesome. And suppose I wanted to use them for private projects and maybe even professionally (just not at work where I created them). Would it be allright for me to just copy/paste those libraries to my own computer? Why would I think this might not be a problem? First of all I used the internet to create those libraries. Very few code is literally copy/pasted, but the code isn't completely mine either (and so not completely my companies', or maybe it is...). Secondly, I am the only one who wrote those libraries and the only one who knows how they work internally. I could re-create them at home in a couple of days. I even took some code from home and used it at work, although there is no way of proving this. For now I am fine with not having these libraries at home. If I really wanted them I could probably ask my boss and he'd be okay with it. I think legally if I took these libraries and my employer found out he could sue me and I'd be in big trouble (although it might be hard to prove I actually took those libraries and not re-created them, especially when I change some variable names etc.). I was just wondering how people here think about this, personally (as opposed to legally). Does anyone have experience with such matters?
The laws of the USA define a "work-for-hire" provision. If there is a written agreement defining the provisions then they rule unless they are clearly unenforceable on their face, i.e. conflict with common law, etc. As I understand it, it is the Employers responsibility to shape the work-for-hire provisions. In the absence of a work-for-hire you normally have more rights. That is what my research seems to indicate. Not being a lawyer I can be wrong of course. Just lookup work-for-hire provisions in the laws of your country. If you are a full-time employee then this is a different issue. Normally you will have to sign a non-compete and employment agreemet that can be full of provisions protecting the employers intellectual property. In this case ask an attorney. Spending $500 on an attorney is better than being sued for $50,000 later.
"Courtesy is the product of a mature, disciplined mind ... ridicule is lack of the same - DPM"
-
Sure, but it's also reasonable that the ideas one uses to do one's work are also able to be used for your own benefit outside of work.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein -
Yeah, I already commented somewhere that anything you do in your private time, but influences your boss' time is your boss' business. Most of what you say doesn't hold true in the Netherlands though. You need a VERY good reason to fire an employee, getting a tattoo or not getting along is no good reason... If you really want to fire an employee (especially when he's been with the company for some time) you better start building a dossier and document every reason to fire that employee. All of them added up might be a good reason, although it's probably still going to cost you a lot of money to have him fired. If you own a small company with little profit a bad employee can literally ruin you and there's little you can do... My dad's employer has a few employees who have been sick for at least two years (you know, they do some lifting and strain their back or something) and they're still paying for those people (they can't be fired). Things work a little different here than in America :) / :-( (sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse) ;)
-
ahmed zahmed wrote:
but it's also reasonable that the ideas one uses to do one's work are also able to be used for your own benefit outside of work.
Unless of course it is contractually stated otherwise.
Again, that depends.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein -
Pualee wrote:
You have already been compensated for their creation
Yeah, very true. How about the ideas? Would it be a problem if I re-created anything. After all, I've been compensated for that too ;)
