Timeline for Engineer refusing to file/disclose patents
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
28 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 31, 2020 at 18:29 | history | undeleted | Neo | ||
| Jan 31, 2020 at 13:42 | history | deleted | Gregory Currie | via Vote | |
| Jan 23, 2020 at 14:49 | history | undeleted | animuson♦ | ||
| Jan 23, 2020 at 0:32 | history | deleted | Gregory Currie | via Vote | |
| Mar 26, 2019 at 15:03 | comment | added | anotherdave |
@GeoffreyBrent sure, sorry %s/copyright/intellectual property :) Think the main point I was trying to make remains the same though — I can't see how a clause to protect their patents could prevent him from deleting things from his own personal laptop.
|
|
| Mar 25, 2019 at 22:45 | comment | added | G_B | @anotherdave This isn't a copyright matter. "Copyright" is one specific form of intellectual property, and it explicitly does not protect ideas. This is about patents and/or trade secrets. | |
| Mar 25, 2019 at 16:41 | comment | added | anotherdave | @otah007 yes, I've had a few like that in the past too. What I was getting at was — if he published the patent as his own, they could probably sue him that it was their copyright as he wrote it while employed there, even if from his own laptop etc. But I don't think they could stop him from deleting work — otherwise he'd never be able to delete any user-generated file from his personal computer (word docs, photos, songs) as the copyright for everything belongs to the company. | |
| Mar 25, 2019 at 15:53 | comment | added | otah007 | @anotherdave This kind of contract is standard in the UK. I just recently signed an internship contract, it states that all IP produced by me is owned by the company, regardless of whether it was developed at work or at home or even if it has any relevance to the company. Its enforcability is a different matter altogether. | |
| Mar 25, 2019 at 14:13 | comment | added | Kirk Broadhurst |
They would have factored in scenarios such as this, as the cost of doing business <- replace would with should
|
|
| Mar 25, 2019 at 14:00 | comment | added | Bob Jarvis - Слава Україні | @SolarMike: I think that at the moment three separate companies (at least) could decide they own every thought in my head. (Which brings to mind the song "905" by the Who, but I digress :-). So, in principle, each of them could require me to sue myself on their behalf in order to transfer the legal rights to my thoughts to themselves. What a court would make of this is anyone's guess. "Now, Mr. Jarvis, as the party of the first part..." "Excuse me, your honor, but Mr. Jarvis is the party of the second part". "Only from yourpoint of view!" Oh, the pain...the pain of it all... :-) | |
| Mar 25, 2019 at 13:52 | comment | added | Bob Jarvis - Слава Україні | @SolarMike: from the agreements I've seen (and signed :-( ) in the past which are similar to this, I don't recall it being limited to things thought of while awake. In short, "We own you. We own every thought you will ever think again, forever. If you think about something we think is valuable and you think you're going to profit from it, think again. Don't even think about it! Come out with your hands up!! We've got the place surrounded!!!". :-) | |
| Mar 25, 2019 at 13:27 | comment | added | MonkeyZeus | "It sounds like you've committed to lose him." sums up this situation beautifully. | |
| Mar 25, 2019 at 13:15 | comment | added | Flater | @SolarMike: Furthermore, it seems that the engineer's genes mutated in a beneficial way during the time of his employment. The engineer must sign a form confirming that the company can now charge royalties for any of the engineer's descendants for using this gene. | |
| Mar 25, 2019 at 12:17 | comment | added | Solar Mike | @BobJarvis I'd go with that... :) It just sometimes seems that some contracts are just too much beyond reasonable - "anything you think of during the hours you are awake belongs to the company"... | |
| Mar 25, 2019 at 12:14 | comment | added | Bob Jarvis - Слава Україні | @SolarMike - good point. The company had a contract with their employee and were providing support to him during the time that these offspring were conceived, gestated, born, and etc. Clearly, anything the progeny do should be the property of the company. Hmmm...do you think dropping a load of soiled diapers on his supervisor's desk would satisfy this requirement? :-) | |
| S Mar 25, 2019 at 9:41 | history | suggested | Pierre Arlaud | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
minor English improvement
|
| Mar 25, 2019 at 9:39 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Mar 25, 2019 at 9:41 | |||||
| Mar 25, 2019 at 9:01 | comment | added | Gregory Currie | @SolarMike Depends if he procreates in his free time, or at work. Sorry, actually, no it doesn't. Never mind me. | |
| Mar 25, 2019 at 9:00 | comment | added | Solar Mike | The company needs to add a clause that anything his descendants develop is also theirs.... | |
| Mar 24, 2019 at 21:40 | comment | added | gregmac | If the company somehow decides "forgetting" == "contractual negligence", I suspect it will greatly increase the exodus of the rest of the decent engineers. Who would want to work somewhere where the mere suggestion they forgot something could be held against them, whether it's as a barrier to advancement or a legal liability? | |
| S Mar 24, 2019 at 19:06 | history | edited | yoozer8 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
patents -> patients typo correction part 2
|
| S Mar 24, 2019 at 19:06 | history | suggested | user1717828 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
patents -> patients typo correction part 2
|
| Mar 24, 2019 at 18:56 | comment | added | anotherdave | @PyRulez (again IANAL), but I don't see how — from what the OP has said, it sounds like work that he was doing in his own time. The company could put in a clause around copyright belonging to them on everything you do, but I don't think they could have a clause saying that you have to keep everything you ever do, even out of hours | |
| Mar 24, 2019 at 18:24 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Mar 24, 2019 at 19:06 | |||||
| Mar 24, 2019 at 17:47 | comment | added | Summer | @PyRulez IANAL I'm not really sure. | |
| Mar 24, 2019 at 17:42 | comment | added | Christopher King | @bruglesco could forgetting where it is be considered contractual negligence? | |
| Mar 24, 2019 at 17:04 | comment | added | Summer | The employee is lying rather than sharing the work because the clause in his contract makes it the companies property. He is legally required to share it if he has it. But if he doesn't remember where it is. . . | |
| Mar 24, 2019 at 15:22 | history | answered | Gregory Currie | CC BY-SA 4.0 |