FreeRouting is gone - Creator was bullied by Zuken to take it down

[tggzzz]

One particularly nasty clause that I hope was unenforceable, tried to give the employer rights over any and all future designs relating to their business,

At one company they wanted me to patent one of my inventions - fair enough, but suddenly deciding patents are important is an orange flag that the company will be sold

Anyway, the wording, in order that I be eligible for the bonus, was that I would do anything necessary to help them get the patent. Naturally there was no restriction on "anything" nor a time limit etc. Hmmm. No.

The twits sent out the agreement to be signed in the form of an unprotected PDF file. That enabled me to edit the PDF source, insert the word "reasonably" (anything reasonably necessary), print and sign that. The twits didn't notice, I got my money and later left the company. Subsequent PDFs were edit-protected

A year or so after I left they sent me paperwork which was something to do with progressing it in the US. They wanted me to sign it, and didn't even have the courtesy to enclose a SASE. It wanted me to do "anything" and didn't even offer expenses. I inserted the word "reasonably"+date+signature half a dozen times and returned it without postage. A few months later I got another, and repeated the performance. They didn't bother a third time

[janoc]

Should have made it more clear, I didn't sign that contract, I spotted the clause and refused to sign, they withdrew the job offer, refusing to rescind the clause.

The company is long gone now, they disappeared after a very expensive legal battle concerning copyright violations. Seems they wanted to protect their IP but had no respect for anyone else's.

Ah right. Then you have actually dodged a rather big bullet. For me a non-negotiable clause like that is a red flag saying "YOU DO NOT WANT TO WORK HERE!" If they treat their own staff like crap it is not surprising that they did others too. So the rest about the copyright is really in line with that, sadly.

[poorchava]

I don't think I would stand in court if this was ever contested. Many countries (Poland where I live included) have special registers of clauses that are forbidden in contracts. I'm pretty sure this would qualify...

Sent from my HTC One M8s using Tapatalk.

[Red Squirrel]

Copyright law pisses me off, it's gotten way too strict and powerful, and is only a benefit for large companies to bully small guys and killing their many hours of work.   The penalties are also way over the top, so people feel no choice but to just comply as it's not worth fighting.  It also costs a lot of money to fight.  You're better off committing a real harmful crime than being found in violation of IP laws. It's also very easy to be in violation due to how broad some trademarks, patents, etc are.   For example there was this youtube channel that decided to trademark the concept of reaction videos.  It actually got approved and everything, and they started sending takedown notices to any video that had the word reaction in it.  Eventually they stopped due to the backlash, but law wise, they were in the right and could have easily kept going.

Sadly even though he may have coded this 100% on his spare time, lot of companies have very strict clauses about conflict of interest.  Some even own anything you do even if it's on your own time.  Some it's even for life.  When you are a new hire at a company you'll sign anything you have to because you need a job.  They put these clauses in there and whether or not you agree or even read them... you do need to sign to keep that job and pay the bills.   The company I work for has clauses like that, anything I make, even on my own time, they own rights to it.  I never heard of anyone actually getting nailed by it though.  I think it's more something they have so if they ever need to, they can persue it.

[Jeroen3]

Even if the contract doesn't state they own you're inventions at home. They can go to court and win.
But only if it's in a related field and the company can prove they have losses.

If you invent a new type of bread at home, while you work for an IT company. It's not theirs.

Something to be aware of when contributing or working on open source stuff.

[CJay]

I don't think I would stand in court if this was ever contested. Many countries (Poland where I live included) have special registers of clauses that are forbidden in contracts. I'm pretty sure this would qualify...

Sent from my HTC One M8s using Tapatalk.

Probably not but can you afford to prove it in court?

[jancumps]

I don't think I would stand in court if this was ever contested. Many countries (Poland where I live included) have special registers of clauses that are forbidden in contracts. I'm pretty sure this would qualify...

Sent from my HTC One M8s using Tapatalk.

Over here it actually helps you in court if the employer has put forbidden clauses in the contract. We just sign off with a smile.

[jancumps]

I don't think I would stand in court if this was ever contested. Many countries (Poland where I live included) have special registers of clauses that are forbidden in contracts. I'm pretty sure this would qualify...

Sent from my HTC One M8s using Tapatalk.

Probably not but can you afford to prove it in court?

You can't prevent a court case. That's not in your hands. If your employee sues you, it happens. Whatever you signed.
Here, you go to a labor court, where the judge knows these clauses very well.

[Jeroen3]

Artikel 7: Indien de arbeid, in dienst van een ander verricht, bestaat in het vervaardigen van bepaalde werken van letterkunde, wetenschap of kunst, dan wordt, tenzij tusschen partijen anders is overeengekomen, als de maker van die werken aangemerkt degene, in wiens dienst de werken zijn vervaardigd.

Where labour carried out by an employee consists in the making of certain literary, scientific or artistic works, the employer shall be deemed the author thereof, unless otherwise agreed between the parties.
^{Source of translation}
Our copyright law says that "some" works crafted during contract period are owned by the employer unless an agreement states otherwise.
I could find at least one case. Dutch case.
http://blog.iusmentis.com/2008/03/08/in-eigen-tijd-gemaakte-software-kan-toch-van-uw-baas-zijn/

^{Note that the interpretation of laws can differ. We only just switched from "you may copy music and movies from the internet for backup purposes use, even from alleged illegal sources" to "you are not allowed to download movies and music form alleged illegal sources". It's all in how you read them. Laws are fun.....}

[Zero999]

Artikel 7: Indien de arbeid, in dienst van een ander verricht, bestaat in het vervaardigen van bepaalde werken van letterkunde, wetenschap of kunst, dan wordt, tenzij tusschen partijen anders is overeengekomen, als de maker van die werken aangemerkt degene, in wiens dienst de werken zijn vervaardigd.

Where labour carried out by an employee consists in the making of certain literary, scientific or artistic works, the employer shall be deemed the author thereof, unless otherwise agreed between the parties.
^{Source of translation}
Our copyright law says that "some" works crafted during contract period are owned by the employer unless an agreement states otherwise.
I could find at least one case. Dutch case.
http://blog.iusmentis.com/2008/03/08/in-eigen-tijd-gemaakte-software-kan-toch-van-uw-baas-zijn/

^{Note that the interpretation of laws can differ. We only just switched from "you may copy music and movies from the internet for backup purposes use, even from alleged illegal sources" to "you are not allowed to download movies and music form alleged illegal sources". It's all in how you read them. Laws are fun.....}

Yes that's true in the UK and most jurisdictions. If someone employs a person to write some software, then the employer owns the copyright, not the employee.

However if the person being employed writes the software, outside of work, for a totally unrelated project, then their employer can't claim the copyright to it.

[Jeroen3]

That is what the case was about. Someone made an open source software project, at home, and used that for work. Which was not allowed because the code at home was somewhat applicable to the code at work.

[Zero999]

That is what the case was about. Someone made an open source software project, at home, and used that for work. Which was not allowed because the code at home was somewhat applicable to the code at work.

There in lies the problem: the two projects were related and he might have had difficulty proving that all of it was all developed outside of work.

Had it been something totally different, it would have been easier to prove.

[station240]

If you want to work on software at all outside of work, especially something that could be/is related to your day job. Then you need the agreement before you start working there.

I have a code Library I wrote entirely on my own, a software company wanted to use it, but also employ me to work on their software in general.
Suffice to say I had to force an agreement, that the Library remained mine, but the company had unlimited use of it.

If the Library needed new code/features I would add them at home, after hours or if I was really paranoid on weekends.
Hence the home computer had the paranoid config of dual independent windows installs, and yes one of them did fall over, took 15 seconds in the BIOS to switch to the other one.

[StuUK]

Pied Piper anyone 

[sarepairman2]

develop that shit on a darknet website its a god damn routing program, you can draw that shit with a pencil

you can draw it on a peice of transparency with a sharpie. they gotta be smoking mad crack to make these allegations