I have read a couple of these employment contracts in detail and they are very broad - they cover anything you think up, even a new recipe, even on your own time, with your own resources, in your own house. Clearly there are many, many cases where the company would not prevail in a court judgement, but in most cases you can't prove you didn't think of it on company time and they want the ability to claim ownership if they see a benefit. Of course they wouldn't go after your new recipe, but it forces the employee into an ethical dilemma when they are asked sign away rights to all ideas.
These blanket "own all IP" and "do not compete" clauses in employment contracts are obviously intended to protect the company from harm, and of course there are lots of ways a company could get harmed. The really sad part of it all is that the lawyers don't seem to realize it is desirable employees with high integrity that refuse to sign up to something they cannot live up to. Companies end up losing good employees by putting overly restrictive and unenforceable clauses in employment contracts. It is ironic that these clauses suggest companies are looking for uncreative and/or unethical employees. But of course they aren't, so common sense usually prevails, even though it leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth.
This is such an open conditional statement --- create anything --- that I question how they define "anything." Is that how the contract is written? Are there any stipulations? Heck, if I bake a cake, do they own that? Does ownership of what you created cover on their premises only, or anywhere?
Most of the time this kind of statement is limited to your production that's relevant to the business in some way.
Now, I can see if it is a creative product -- piece of art or video, etc. -- and let's say that output was an early draft that was not used for the business or a client. Who owns the early draft that may just be deleted or tossed in the trash can? Gets fuzzy here. I suppose they own it even though it appears to have no market value.
At element14, our terms and conditions stipulate that content you created can be used by the company (us) for marketing purposes, etc.
Had an offer like this, asked them to change the contract they ended up moving on and I'm happy they did. Any company with such an attitude is not a compny I want to be part of or a company people can truly feel free to thrive.
I suspect intellectual property is what such a contract clause is trying to capture. Companies have a vested interest in what you are thinking, since they may have contributed to the thought.
The employee/employer relationship has changed. Employers are trying to secure, with a contact, the benefits they once received but were assumed in the former relationship. Loyalty and quid pro quo (you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours) was part of that old relationship. That benefit is no longer part of the new employee/employer relationship. You are paid and when no longer required you are released.
Employees need to recognize the new relationship paradigm. They need to be vigilant and understand the most important person to look out for their interest is themselves. Looking out for number one is a survival skill best learned early. The company can promise and try but in the end they have an underlying conflict of interest.
They tried to pull this kind of agreement on engineers in the 1980's and after some lawyers saw it they informed the company that such an agreement was illegal in the US and they went away.
We did have to sign away our rights to company funded and customer funded projects, but anything non work related was exempt.
I emailed the company to find out if I can get it in writing as I did get a verbal confirmation that it would not effect my hobby's or things I may make when not at work with them. As much as I hate turning down employment I have to say that its a big thorn in my side having to agree to something like that not knowing for sure that my projects and things I make are mine. I don't mind giving them away to the communities, but not to have a company own them.
I've had that, asked them to fix the clause and they verbally agreed but wouldn't do it on paper. Its not legal but the bigger issue is they had decided to make the contract follow the law from a different province and this would basically force me to fight them in a court in that province, to much time and money involved in that so basically after soem back and forth they decided to pass on the offer. Also having a foreign government backing them made me even more cautious about the offer.
Top Comments
Why would you invent something that has nothing to do with the company, while at work?
Whatever you programming/create/invent in the context of your job, while at work, becomes property of the company,…
They tried to pull this kind of agreement on engineers in the 1980's and after some lawyers saw it they informed the company that such an agreement was illegal in the US and they went away.
We did have…