Companies that allow you to work on independent side projects?

arleitiss

Hey, just out of interest - I heard before that in many companies/jobs you have to sign some kind of contract which makes sure you don't work on anything else but your job, like even side projects/games at home in your spare time, is that true?

If so - what are some companies that allow you to do that? I heard before that google allows you to do that?

What's the story with this?

Raging_Ninja

One of my friends has a contract like that with a multinational.

They typically say they want people who love coding, do their own projects etc, then once they hire them punish the shit out of you (or alternatively say that THEY own anything you make on your own time) if you dare do it while working for them.

TBH I'd do my best to have it removed from the contract before signing it. If they really want you, you should be able to negotiate it out of the contract.

croo

Any employment contract I ever had allowed work on other/side projects. But they also always stipulated that the results of any such work was the property of the company!

bpmurray

The usual situation is that you can do what you like outside work unless you have explicitly granted rights to the company in your contract (very unusual in Ireland and I don't know if it can be legally enforced). However, most companies have a non-complete clause, so that you can't develop a competing product. Also, IP is usually owned by the company, so if you patent something, the company owns the patent.

One area to be very careful of is open source: if you participate in an OS project, you may be "contaminated" to the extent that you would not be allowed to work on similar projects for your employer, effectively firing yourself!

croo

bpmurray wrote: »

TOne area to be very careful of is open source: if you participate in an OS project, you may be "contaminated" to the extent that you would not be allowed to work on similar projects for your employer, effectively firing yourself!

How could that be? You cannot patent software (in Europe) so unless you plan to copy the work (of others) from the FOSS project I fail to see how one could be deemed contaminated?

bpmurray

croo wrote: »

How could that be? You cannot patent software (in Europe) so unless you plan to copy the work (of others) from the FOSS project I fail to see how one could be deemed contaminated?

You're confusing things: if you patent a s/w idea in the US or any of the other countries that do accept s/w patents, the patent usually belongs to your employer, but of course it depends on your contract.

As for the issue of contamination by FOSS: if you participate in e.g. a GPL project which contains functionality that overlaps with a project at work, the lawyers will not allow you to touch the proprietary code since you have already seen the GPL'ed code. The effect is that there could potentially be accusations that something was copied from GPL which would mean that the entire project would have to be GPL'ed. It doesn't matter how honest or how carefully you separate the two, if there's a suggestion of cross-contamination, that's enough to drop you from the project and delete all your contributions.

Just to be absolutely clear about this, it's standard practice for multi-nationals, so be careful. If you work at one, I bet you'll find that they have formal policies about participation in FOSS projects. I've started a few in my time, but I always use the Apache or BSD licences - I prefer BSD since it offers the most freedom of action.

croo

bpmurray wrote: »

You're confusing things: if you patent a s/w idea in the US or any of the other countries that do accept s/w patents, the patent usually belongs to your employer, but of course it depends on your contract.

I think you'll find I'm not confused, that we are in Europe (not the US) and there are no software patents. But I do agree (and said) that it is typical for the employment contracts to stipulate the results of any effort [the copyrighted code - or indeed any patent you received if it were a non software project] would belong to the employer. So I would say, if you want to get involved in a FOSS project do double check your contract and ask permission [in writing] if you have doubts. Usually, on a FOSS project, you are asked to sign a contributor agreement whereby you declare you are entitled to contribute any code you do... it can work both ways and the project can be contaminated if someone were to illegally copy & contribute code from some proprietary software.

bpmurray wrote: »

Just to be absolutely clear about this, it's standard practice for multi-nationals, so be careful. If you work at one, I bet you'll find that they have formal policies about participation in FOSS projects.

I don't work for a multinational currently (not directly anyway), but I have done in the past and never found this to be the case, but FOSS was not so prevalent then.
I would go as far to say the experience on a FOSS projects would be welcomed. Sure you could argue the same for any experience? I have worked on ERP/MRP software for one multinational and was then hired by another precisely because I done the work for the first! Would I not contaminate the code of the 2nd project?
As an aside, I know that there are usually non-compete clauses in employment contracts but I have had more than one future employer tell they were non-enforceable within the EU... something about a restriction of trade!?

bpmurray wrote: »

I've started a few in my time, but I always use the Apache or BSD licences - I prefer BSD since it offers the most freedom of action.

A few? Which projects? Out of curiosity.

I cannot see how the different licenses would have any impact, not unless you planned to simply copy code... which would be wrong and illegal. To me that would be akin to the "gang of four" suing everyone because they use code that implements the ideas they put forward in their copyrighted book [as an example, it was the 20th anniversary of their book recently so they came to mind ].

bpmurray

croo wrote: »

I think you'll find I'm not confused, that we are in Europe (not the US) and there are no software patents. But I do agree (and said) that it is typical for the employment contracts to stipulate the results of any effort [the copyrighted code - or indeed any patent you received if it were a non software project] would belong to the employer. So I would say, if you want to get involved in a FOSS project do double check your contract and ask permission [in writing] if you have doubts. Usually, on a FOSS project, you are asked to sign a contributor agreement whereby you declare you are entitled to contribute any code you do... it can work both ways and the project can be contaminated if someone were to illegally copy & contribute code from some proprietary software.

Of course your contract decides how things are done, but I know of no US-based company that does not include an IP clause which means that your patents become theirs. And it doesn't matter if you're in the EU - all my patents were issued by the USPTO despite me living here (with the exception of a couple filed while I was over there).

Actually some FOSS organizations, like ASF, require a release from your employer too.

I don't work for a multinational currently (not directly anyway), but I have done in the past and never found this to be the case, but FOSS was not so prevalent then.

I would go as far to say the experience on a FOSS projects would be welcomed. Sure you could argue the same for any experience? I have worked on ERP/MRP software for one multinational and was then hired by another precisely because I done the work for the first! Would I not contaminate the code of the 2nd project?
As an aside, I know that there are usually non-compete clauses in employment contracts but I have had more than one future employer tell they were non-enforceable within the EU... something about a restriction of trade!?

Well, contamination really is an issue and you're right about the sources - of course you can't copy code from anywhere. open source or not. However, if you work on a FOSS implementation of a specific technology, I would doubt that you would be allowed to be involved in an identical project at your employer. For example I was on a JCP JSR working on the reference implementation of one of the JEE technologies, so I couldn't work directly on the in-house clean-room implementation. Your example of working on one product and then being hired to work on an identical project may well be covered by the very few situations where the non-compete clause actually does apply.

And on the non-compete clause, there are 2 kinds: don't work for a competitor when you leave although this is unenforceable unless you have a critical level of skill and knowledge that would materially impact your old employer, and another where you write a competing product while still employed - this one will get you fired.

Any good measurable experience is highly regarded and that includes working on FOSS projects. Working on a related area is OK - the problem only arises where you might bring some inappropriate knowledge with you into the employer's products. So of course FOSS experience is a great scalp when looking for a job.

A few? Which projects? Out of curiosity.

Nothing special or successful - one was a function to download, read, interpret and load the data from an XMLTV provider into a TV box that didn't have great EPG support (C), another was an image conversion quality measurement intended for museum archives that eventually was picked up and morphed into something else - a great example of BSD at work since this was just copied and repurposed with no requirements pushed on the copier.

I cannot see how the different licenses would have any impact, not unless you planned to simply copy code... which would be wrong and illegal. To me that would be akin to the "gang of four" suing everyone because they use code that implements the ideas they put forward in their copyrighted book [as an example, it was the 20th anniversary of their book recently so they came to mind ].

Well BSD allows you to do anything with the code, so there won't be any real comeback if you are contaminated, but GPL could force the entire product to be released under the GPL if some of the code originated in a GPL project. That's where different licensing comes in. Having worked with Erich Gamma, I'm pretty certain that he would have been very explicit about the licensing of the code in the GoF book, although I have no idea what licensing was used. If it was GPL (unlikely) it would mean that anyone who had used their samples would have to release their products under GPL. In other words, that really would allow the GoF to sue everyone!

CreepingDeath

In general, companies won't care what you develop outside of work.

It's only when it comes into conflict with the company, eg. you develop something that could compete or undercut a company product, or something they could incorporate into their product set.

It's even in my contract that if I develop something, that even after I leave the company I might be called upon to help with the patenting process.... it's just something they throw into the contract, boilerplate stuff, but never gets used.

I've developed a few utilities that could be applicable to our business sector but haven't open sourced them.
But If I were to, I'd probably approach my bosses and say I'd like to open source these utilities, and could give them their own separate licence to use it any way they like outside of the open source system.

Separate to that if you develop some android app and are providing support/answering e-mails on the company time about it, then that's a HR problem.

But in general, if a company needs to "rob" its employees of their personal work instead of focus on their own business model, then it's a sign of desparation on their part.

If you do have some good open source projects or pet projects you're working on, you might consider declaring them before you join a company.

Graham

CreepingDeath wrote: »

But in general, if a company needs to "rob" its employees of their personal work instead of focus on their own business model, then it's a sign of desparation on their part.

Or it could be a sign the company is trying to protect itself against claims of copyright infringement from ex-employees or future ex-employees.

The Corinthian

Graham wrote: »

Or it could be a sign the company is trying to protect itself against claims of copyright infringement from ex-employees or future ex-employees.

Sort of, it's just putting all the clauses in a contract that it can get away with that may suit it. All employment contracts will tend to do this to cover all their bases and because prospective employees will sign anyway, even if the clause is unenforceable or illegal. A good example are those clauses that essentially imply that you can't work for any other software company for something like 2 years after you leave them. Naturally that would mean you'd have to take up another career or stay on the Dole were you to comply, so it effectively is unenforceable in court. To cover their legal asses, as a result, all contracts will include a savings clause (something like "if any part of this contract is declared invalid, the rest of the contract remains valid").

Given this, I've always refused to sign any contract that includes any "we own anything you do in your own time" clause. Stipulating a non-compete or protecting company IP or assets is fair enough, but such blanket clauses are frankly lazy at best and sinister at worst.

Graham

The Corinthian wrote: »

Sort of, it's just putting all the clauses in a contract that it can get away with that may suit it. All employment contracts will tend to do this to cover all their bases and because prospective employees will sign anyway, even if the clause is unenforceable or illegal. A good example are those clauses that essentially imply that you can't work for any other software company for something like 2 years after you leave them. Naturally that would mean you'd have to take up another career or stay on the Dole were you to comply, so it effectively is unenforceable in court. To cover their legal asses, as a result, all contracts will include a savings clause (something like "if any part of this contract is declared invalid, the rest of the contract remains valid").

Given this, I've always refused to sign any contract that includes any "we own anything you do in your own time" clause. Stipulating a non-compete or protecting company IP or assets is fair enough, but such blanket clauses are frankly lazy at best and sinister at worst.

I'm sure you're right, it's a lazy way of blanket ass-covering. I certainly don't think there are many cases where such a clause is in place to 'rob' an employees personal projects as someone else suggested.

The Corinthian

Graham wrote: »

I'm sure you're right, it's a lazy way of blanket ass-covering. I certainly don't think there are many cases where such a clause is in place to 'rob' an employees personal projects as someone else suggested.

You'd be surprised. It actually happens a lot from what I gather.

Graham

The Corinthian wrote: »

You'd be surprised. It actually happens a lot from what I gather.

Thanks, disturbing to know

arleitiss

Well okay after few days of reading responses, I will clear up things a bit about my situation.
This year I am graduating from college, getting BSc in Computer Science, did LOADS of independent learning even outside of college requirements. Ended up knowing:

Java, Android Native (java) very well, PHP, C#, JavaScript, MySQL, SQLite, Node.js, many CMS's, many IDE's, HTML5, CSS3, Linux, Cloud Servers, Servers setup in general, Facebook, Instagram, Flickr, Google Maps for Websites and Android, API's, Networking in general, 3D Modelling, Photoshop, Vector Drawing, 3D Animation and then Game Engines like: Source, Unreal, CryEngine, Unity then there are minor things I know not so well.

So anyway, sometimes when I am bored, I like to start my own projects like apps, games, combine as much of above skills as possible into 1 project to make something huge and interesting or to just upskill. Sometimes I release apps on android market.

Kind of in same boat right now, I don't monetize or advertise my apps or anything I release as college policy states that any profit I make - 90% of it goes to college, basically it belongs to college whatever I make.

So I kind of don't want to be stuck in same crap situation when I get into work.

The Corinthian

arleitiss wrote: »

So I kind of don't want to be stuck in same crap situation when I get into work.

Bottom line:

Many employment contracts contain no such clauses or if mentioned will specifically cover projects that may be related to or in competition to the company and/or have used company resources to build.

If a 'we own what your ideas' clause is present you can negotiate for it to be amended or removed before signing.

If they refuse, you can just turn down the job. If more candidates did this, such sweeping clauses would quickly vanish.

Graham

Just apply for jobs like every other candidate, then ask the question if you get offered one of them.

LukeQuietus

Graham wrote: »

Just apply for jobs like every other candidate, then ask the question if you get offered one of them.

Agreed. Might be putting the cart before the horse I think...