Work Contract - IP and Copyright

Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
29,263
Location
Cornwall
I remember this clause or very similar from thirty years ago, working as an employee Civil Engineer.

If you develop something possibly based on knowlege gained as part of your employment and it would assist the employer in his business, ie he could develop an income stream for the company using it then where ever or on what device it was developed on he may claim an interest. Mostly unless it was within the normal business of the company he / they would not.
That sounds like it could potentially stop the employee from undertaking similar work should he leave the company.

I thought those kinds of clauses were not legal in this country (aka non-compete).

You can't legally prevent someone from working in this country AFAIK. Ie you can't force an engineer to work in McDonalds rather than continue to be an engineer for another company. The above clause could potentially prevent that former employee from working in a related field (either for himself or another company).

"Knowledge gained" doesn't even have to be inside secrets in this clause - it could be literally anything.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
29,074
Location
Ottakring, Vienna.
This forum has some real masters at dragging a simple statement way outside it's intended scope.

The intention of clauses like this is pretty straightforward.

Scenarios:
I'm a Salesforce developer, employed at a company, and I as part of my job I am working on a project for a customer. In the process of solving the customer's problem, I develop or invent or inadvertently invent something awesome that could be bundled up and sold as an app to further customers. That app would not be mine - it would be the IP of my employer.

I'm a researcher and I am tasked by my research company to look into radiation sickness. In the process, I find a cure for radiation sickness. That cure is not mine, it belongs to the company I work for.

Key point:
These things happen while I am at work, doing work for my employer

If you are a landscape garner but you discover a way to breathe underwater whilst you are sitting on the sofa, then no, of course this is not the IP of your employer.
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Mar 2010
Posts
14,359
Location
5 degrees starboard
That sounds like it could potentially stop the employee from undertaking similar work should he leave the company.

I thought those kinds of clauses were not legal in this country (aka non-compete).

You can't legally prevent someone from working in this country AFAIK. Ie you can't force an engineer to work in McDonalds rather than continue to be an engineer for another company. The above clause could potentially prevent that former employee from working in a related field (either for himself or another company).

"Knowledge gained" doesn't even have to be inside secrets in this clause - it could be literally anything.

No, it does not. If you leave the employment, the clause ends then but it may be replaced by a similar one from a new employer. It is standard fare as I have understood it for many salaried staff for many years. It is not non compete. It is largely an issue of common sense.
 
Associate
Joined
4 Dec 2009
Posts
518
I see so if you are a bus driver during the day. You can't take a job being a delivery driver at the weekend. Because use the same skill and knowledge. Driving.
This has no IP or copyright involved so on that basis would be fine.
Most jobs mention secondary employement in there contracts though so on that basis it should have been raised with someone.
They are not going to be able to object based on your skills, they are legally allowed to object based on the fact it makes you unavailable to work extra if a provision was made for that in your contract.
 
Associate
Joined
4 Dec 2009
Posts
518
They have a knowledge of driving and navigation.

If I create software. Then create a completely different piece of software. Using a different language for a different business area it's a bit much for some one to claim it's all the same IP. What if I'm a contractor working on one contract part of the week, and a different contract in a different business area the rest of the week. That is common enough.

When I worked in design you'd have multiple projects all in the go at the same time.
This is pretty much what I do and have done for 20+ years.

Ive done this before and the outcome was I handed over my stuff but then got paid for my time.

I have to re invent the wheel on allot of similar projects as I can reuse my skills and knowledge but cannot re use the IP I created using those skills and knowledge, especialy when someone else paid for my time.
The clauses in contracts are very generic on purpose to be a cover all and catch all in order to be a deterent becuase no one wants the hassle of enforcing them.
It becomes even more of a quagmire when you start to mix in Open Source components and code.

Its one of the reasons you dont seem many stories of someone inventing that killer app in there free time after work.
What they do instead is prototype and get feedback, quit working (This makes most, but not all the clauses void), get funding, create a startup.
This happens all the time. 2-3 people have an idea in the pub work on it in secret for a few months and then all leave to creater HippsterChat2020 edition.

Or they just code games outside of work and no one cares about those.
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Dec 2006
Posts
5,129
This is pretty much what I do and have done for 20+ years.

So will anyone who's over 40 and working in development.

Ive done this before and the outcome was I handed over my stuff but then got paid for my time.

I have to re invent the wheel on allot of similar projects as I can reuse my skills and knowledge but cannot re use the IP I created using those skills and knowledge, especialy when someone else paid for my time.
The clauses in contracts are very generic on purpose to be a cover all and catch all in order to be a deterent becuase no one wants the hassle of enforcing them.
It becomes even more of a quagmire when you start to mix in Open Source components and code.

Its one of the reasons you dont seem many stories of someone inventing that killer app in there free time after work.
What they do instead is prototype and get feedback, quit working (This makes most, but not all the clauses void), get funding, create a startup.
This happens all the time. 2-3 people have an idea in the pub work on it in secret for a few months and then all leave to creater HippsterChat2020 edition.

Or they just code games outside of work and no one cares about those.

Most people will know this. That's just normal stuff. My issue was with the suggestion that there was an issue with the same tools, tech and services as overlap.
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Dec 2006
Posts
5,129
I recently was involved in the redevelopment of a company portal and it became apparent that the company had not bought the IP of the branding they had outsourced from a developer. This they had to do before they could use it again for something else.

Above one is tendering for outsourced development work. You have to make sure that the development company hands over the IP to the code base in case you want to bring the project in house in the future. Not all development houses will agree to this. So you have to have this as part of the tendering criteria.
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,899
I disagree I think we crossed into inferring certain skillsets like IT skillsets (knowledge) or tools can't be used outside your primary employment.

No one made that claim AFAIK - again quote what you're referent to - AFAIK the poster was referring to overlap with the employer's business/employee's job.

That isn't about IP that's about stopping you working for a competitor. But you often see these kinda of clauses in contracts.

Stopping you from working for a competitor is certainly a possible clause in a contract, not just in the course of employment but also for a period of time after in some cases, though that isn't what is being discussed here.
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,899
I thought those kinds of clauses were not legal in this country (aka non-compete).

You can't legally prevent someone from working in this country AFAIK. Ie you can't force an engineer to work in McDonalds rather than continue to be an engineer for another company. The above clause could potentially prevent that former employee from working in a related field (either for himself or another company).

Not entirely correct, I did get some advice on this from an employment solicitor when signing a non compete, the jist of it was that some non competes are LOL-worthy and go way too far in terms of scope with regards to what they cover, the duration they're in force and the geographical area they cover. They've got to be reasonable and relative to the employee's position within the company/potential damage the company might sustain etc...

AFAIK there have also been problems when companies try to enforce a non-compete that someone signed as a junior employee and that was unreasonable for their position at that time even though at the time they left the company they were a senior employee and the non-compete would have otherwise perhaps have been enforceable or partially enforceable had they signed it in that capacity... companies need to make sure that the agreement is suitable for the position and get people to sign new ones if/when they're promoted in some cases.
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,899
Why selectively quote - so you are talking about post #24 - his point is clearly about the potential for overlap, the thread is about IP what does anything that isn't proprietary have to do with this*? He hasn't claimed it necessarily will conflict but it is something where there is a possible conflict. I don't see how you can go from the below quote from Monkeybasher to a claim this:

Someone implied that creating any software is all the same as it's creating something.

That isn't what he's said at all.

Those two areas have allot of cross over in terms of tools, tech and services these days. For example Monzo is quite a social aware banking system.
Both those markets will use encryption and client server tech.
So yes, you should raise this.

It is probably unlikely that there will be a conflict there but it is possible. If you want then you can ask him to clarify further - why carry on with some straw man argument and throw in ridiculous examples of a Bus driver working as a delivery driver part time (something that has nothing to do with IP) - I'm really not sure what you hope to achieve by arguing against something no one intended or that you've seemingly wilfully misunderstood.

*in so far as we're not talking about you use X open source library in work and also use it in your side project - that doesn't necessarily provide for any conflict of interests here
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
12 Dec 2006
Posts
5,129
I was commenting in general about the thread and IP/Contracts. Not to one specific comment as you keep assuming.
The bus thing was hyperbole not to be taken literally as you keep trying to do. The world has moved on. Please do the same.
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,899
Well no one in the general thread has implied what you claimed so I'm not really sure what you're arguing against or what the point of your hyperbolic comment was?
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Dec 2006
Posts
5,129
I disagree that it wasn't implied. But I can move past that.

Most people haven't had direct hands on experience of creating commercial and/or enterprise software or creating designs or content that is copyrighted. Most people have jobs where this isn't an issue. So they won't get it.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,899
I don’t know on what basis you can claim that nor do I see the point in trying to when you don’t either quote the post or ask the poster to clarify, it is nonsense so I get why you’d move past it. No one claimed or implied it.

These contracts are generally applicable to people who are involved in the creation of software or similar, they might not be applicable or particularly reasonable otherwise.

The best thing to do in the OP’s case is just pay for a consultation from a solicitor specialising in this area, you can even just e-mail the contract to them.
 
Back
Top Bottom