narayan@twg-ap.UUCP (04/11/87)
Recently I have noticed people posting software (such as /bin/true),
and proclaiming it is in public domain (there was one such posting
recently from someone in AT&T). Most people I know have signed
agreements with the companies that they work for, which claim
ownership of any inventions, ideas, and such as long as they are
conceived while the person still works for the company. I would
be wary of picking up such software, which is proclaimed to be
in public domain without first checking carefully about the legal
ramifications involved. I would also suggest that people should
be careful about claiming programs that they wrote (even at home)
is in public domain without first verifying the employment
contract that they may have signed with their employer.
--
Narayan Mohanram
Phone: 415-962 7170
ARPANET twg-ap!narayan@lll-tis-b.ARPA
Usenet {attunix, ihnp4}!amdahl!twg-ap!narayan
USnail The Wollongong Group
1129 San Antonio Road
Palo Alto, CA 94303. USA
=========================================================
|| If you can't lick it, try some whipped cream ||
=========================================================cetron@utah-cs.UUCP (04/12/87)
I think I now know why the wollongong software is so poor - it was someones PD software which TWG 'appropriated'...... Most companies make it very clear what is yours and what is theirs. And I seem to remember the big court case about some guy from sears and wrenches which ruled that what you do on your own time is yours. The only place that I know of where this IS a problem is with graduate student employees in universitys. (note that the first line DOES NOT have smileys) -ed cetron cetron@cs.utah.edu
mjranum@gouldsd.UUCP (04/13/87)
In article <197@twg-ap.UUCP>, narayan@twg-ap.UUCP (Narayan Mohanram) writes: > Recently I have noticed people posting software (such as /bin/true), > and proclaiming it is in public domain (there was one such posting > recently from someone in AT&T). Most people I know have signed > agreements with the companies that they work for, which claim > ownership of any inventions, ideas, and such as long as they are > conceived while the person still works for the company. I would > be wary of picking up such software, which is proclaimed to be > in public domain without first checking carefully about the legal > ramifications involved. [...] Yeah ? And where is YOUR corporate notice in your posting ? If you have used someone else's computer to post to the net, there is a good chance they own your posting. Assuming you'd said anything valuable, you might be in for HUGE damages. Am I the only person out here who thinks this whole resurgence of legalistic weenieism is hurting the unix community at large ? I *KNOW* it protects the company's interests, and makes it profitable for them, but I can't help but wonder if little more anarchy would do some good. Anyone out there interested in becoming a software terrorist ? If we fight this absurd nonsense it may stop. For the next 3 years, maybe you should give every scrap of paper you make a mark on to the comapany. It's proprietary writing. Don't you guys out there realize that this is only going to get worse ?!!? The current tax law and the unconstitutional implementation of it is a result of just such kowtowing to anyone who smacks of authority. "let's kill the mother before it gets HEAVY" -- Copyright, 1987 - Anarchist Software Foundation - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED In reproducing this document in any form, the licensee (you) agrees to pay the ASF 5$/copy distributed, and to admit that software law is a subject better left for lawyers and slimy nerds. Live Free or die !
dgreen@ucla-cs.UUCP (04/14/87)
In article <197@twg-ap.UUCP> narayan@twg-ap.UUCP (Narayan Mohanram) writes: > Most people I know have signed >agreements with the companies that they work for, which claim >ownership of any inventions, ideas, and such as long as they are >conceived while the person still works for the company. 1. I never sign those stupid agreements without crossing out all the stuff that says my employer owns work done on my time. Having done that now at 5 employers, and never having been challenged, I think it's safe for you to do it. I even did it at IBM, where legalisms and bureaucracy rule. 2. Legal precedent (as discussed in another posting) negates Narayam's admonition. Employees DO own the work they do on their own time, regardless of the illegal clauses in their employment contract. _D_a_n_ _G_r_e_e_n_i_n_g _A_R_P_A- dgreen@CS.UCLA.EDU _U_U_C_P- ..!{sdcrdcf,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!dgreen _D_a_n_ _G_r_e_e_n_i_n_g _A_R_P_A- dgreen@CS.UCLA.EDU _U_U_C_P- ..!{sdcrdcf,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!dgreen
gwyn@brl-smoke.UUCP (04/14/87)
In article <5513@shemp.UCLA.EDU> dgreen@CS.UCLA.EDU (Dan R. Greening) writes: >1. I never sign those stupid agreements without crossing out all the stuff > that says my employer owns work done on my time. Hear, hear! I too have done this. A company owns the amount of my time they pay for; the rest belongs to me. A more appropriate restriction would be that any development clearly arising from company resources belongs to the company. By the way, I notice several people including the entire contents of /bin/true except for the copyright notice...
billp@unet.UUCP (04/16/87)
For what it's worth... I have been asked to sign one of these agreements at every place I've ever worked. I've always edited the agreement to be more reasonable. The one time I got any comment about "changing the standard agreement" I pointed out that the items I changed were an illegal infringment on my rights. The response was "Well, we know that we're writing a new one." They also tried "Well, if it's illegal just sign it anyway." Needless to say that is a bad idea. I told them I'd be glad to sign the new one when they had it prepared, if it was reasonable. They said fine. I worked at that company six years, they never changed the agreement. A little common sense goes a long way. If I worked for AT&T and posted a design for a public domain telephone I'd have to be a little worried. If I worked for See's candy company and posted the same article I think a See's legal dept. person that wrote me a flame about my posting would be a little off base. *Today's Sermon* It is the social responsibility of people who have knowledge to share it. If people stop sharing information, progress stops. No one person or group can know enough to make a real breakthrough without all the information that came before. Life isn't long enough to discover everything for yourself. A company that takes on the responsibility of holding knowledge as property also has the responsibility to make use of the information. In short they shouldn't be allowed to sit on it because they think they own it. If See's tells me I can't post my design for the phone they better be ready to start manufacturing phones. Bill Putney