Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.programmer:2099 comp.software-eng:755 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!rutgers!cmcl2!rna!marc From: marc@rna.UUCP (Marc Johnson) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer,comp.software-eng Subject: Re: Work for Hire contracts Message-ID: <216@rna.UUCP> Date: 16 Aug 88 16:13:52 GMT References: <496@hudson.acc.virginia.edu> <25636@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <25638@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <3110@sdsu.UUCP> Reply-To: marc@rna.UUCP (Marc Johnson) Organization: Rockefeller University Neurobiology Lines: 53 In article <3110@sdsu.UUCP> roetzhei@sdsu.UCSD.EDU (William Roetzheim) writes: >In article <25638@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> oster@dewey.soe.berkeley.edu.UUCP (David Phillip Oster) writes: >>An Open Letter to Contract Programmers. >> >>Hire" is completely unfair. Think twice before you >>sign any "work for hire" contract, and better yet, >>refuse to sign. > > I do, however, agree with Phillip if we restrict the argument a bit. >I believe that the company 'owns' everything produced on company time. >This means that programmers can not code on company time and then take >the code (or fragments of the code) home to use for other purposes. > I generally agree with this point, provided there is some clear definition of "company time". My contracts often try to include anything done on "company equipment," which I have some problems with. >... I also >believe that knowledge entrusted to an employee by the company to do his/her >work belongs to the company and can not be used for personal gain. On the >other hand, I believe that a programmer (or anyone else) has the right to >use his/her talents and skills to produce code/algorithms/etc. on his or >her own time, and that the company has no rights to these items. > Be careful here..."knowledge entrusted to an employee" is a very broad statement. I did some work for a bank in New York and the contract basically stated that they owned my brain and everything in it! Working for a company on a project, you cannot help but be exposed to information that you would not otherwise have known. Unless this is "proprietary" or "trade secret" in nature (unique to the company and solely developed by them), I don't see how one can be restrained from using whatever the hell you learned working on the first project on the next one. I even think it is perfectly reasonable for to you to write the exact same type of system (hopefully fixing all the things you did wrong the first time) for someone else, provided you don't actually copy the code. This amounts to employing techniques, concept and ideas that you developed/learned in your first project. This is learning! This is life! Working for someone doesn't remove your humanity. By the way, your attempt to restrict the argument to other "technical" fields is unreasonable. Many of the same principles apply to virtually all other free-lance type work: writing, film, architecture, CERTAINLY law, accounting, consulting engineering, etc etc etc. You mean to suggest that a lawyer drafting contracts for a company or an accounting reviewing the books doesn't have access to certain "inside" information? A lawyer can re-draft an identical contract for another company, employing form, wording, and anything other knowledge gained by working on the first contract. Ditto the accountant solving a tax problem, for example. You can't own someone's brain, no matter who tries to do so!!!!! Marc Johnson