>> Don't the vast majority of companies have clauses in contracts that say whatever you create on your particular work laptop belongs to the company? I certainly have that in my contract.
> What do you think the chances are of your company actually being able to enforce said clauses?
Moderate to Very high, depending on the jurisdiction you live in. Like I’ve seen it play out multiple times with colleagues even, and one took it to court even and lost.
> I can say without a doubt that mine hasn't broken any laws.
I hope that's merely your own misinformed conclusion and not what your attorneys actually told you. Because if they did guarantee this, you should probably look into getting new ones.
Assuming you're in the US, your congress already invented* laws it's illegal to know whether they affect you or whether you are guilty of them.
Of course those are coming for terrorists, so you don't need to speak out/worry because you're not a terrorist.
So while it's very likely that your company might not be breaking any laws, if your attorneys guarantee it, they're either lying/ignorant or breaking the law themselves.
OK so how's this relevant to the guy selling candy? The point is, it doesn't matter whether it's legal for him to sell these candies, the big deal is whether it's right for him to do so.
These attorneys you're hiring, are not for guiding you on the Right Path of being a "good" company, you hired them to protect you from the Beast of the Law.
*blatantly copied the idea from Kafka, who had prior art, the thieving bastards
> Any company that doesn't play by the same rules as you, doesn't deserve your business.
Which companies do play by the same rules as you? I can't think of any time I've been able to compel a company to use an arbiter of my choosing for any disputes.
>> Don't the vast majority of companies have clauses in contracts that say whatever you create on your particular work laptop belongs to the company? I certainly have that in my contract.
What do you think the chances are of your company actually being able to enforce said clauses?
> invalidate Alice's agreement with IndependentSoftwareFoundation because Alice didn't follow the right internal procedures with her employer?
Internal procedures are not the law. The contacts are. If the contract says her software belongs to the company, then it does. (Unless the country law says otherwise of course)
In the same way I can't legally sell you a copy of Windows license that I totally promise I've got an agreement with MS about. It's not a license I have rights to.
Probably a bit of debate here, there are for sure some absurd ones I've read about here. I understand why companies feel the need to protect themselves though, even if its wrong.
> extended options execution windows
This is just stupid and I'm not sure anyone thinks the current system is good, not employees, not employers and not even the IRS.
> I see no consideration for those whom are employed under employement contract to assign both moral rights and intellectual property to their employer.
(I am *not* a lawyer. I'm not even American.)
Can you set up any intellectual property through a trust? If the trust owns the IP, and the trust does not have a contract with your employer, can you write code for the trust, thus protecting it?
That they are annoyed by the implication that a company's contracts with a governmental agency should have any bearing on whether one should consider using their product, I would have thought.
>I believe most major tech companies or well-funded startups do the same.
That's nice. Are those the only types of businesses who can enter the market? I'm also aware of modules, but using them is not free.
Your concept of the law is more wrong, and this I offer as proof: Language is imprecise and limited. It is more likely that the text of the law fails to track the intent of the law than otherwise.
Throughout this I have never said I would disregard a notice that a product I had made was emitting or otherwise faulty, and indeed I believe that is the first check on most low volume products that are sold "without certification."
To behave otherwise, and allow the prior limiting of otherwise benign and nondisruptive behavior, is to give in to petty tyranny and against the founding ethos of the United States.
>what do you think profitable companies would do to their ML engineers over a product issue like this if there was no law under which they would be sued?
Nothing. Maybe a reprimand at best, because the consequences of this are fairly minor. If a store erroneously bans you and them unbans you and says that there was a mixup with their policy, then what do you think should be the consequences to the store? If it's effectively a monopoly then I can see there being problems, but if it's just a random store then that doesn't really matter.
>Gary has every right to object if Indiana says he can only sell chainsaws made in Indiana, as that would be an absurd law.
He has the right to object in any case. That's free speech. But despite all his objections, he either does his business respecting the law or doesn't do business at all.
It's funny that you think that such a law would be absurd, when laws that require a store to sell locally-produced goods over imported ones also already exist in the real world.
>Forcing me to run servers in France is absurd.
You're welcome to think that. Don't run servers in France then.
> It is kinda surreal that a company obeying the law is headline news.
That is an unreal level of politicking. You can't see any reason why companies might prefer to pay a fine than obey a law?
If you lived in an HOA, and that HOA mandated that all your lawn ornaments must be bright pink by next week, how eager would you be to comply by next week? If the fine for non-compliance was only $1 per year, would you prefer to pay the fine?
I'm trying to illustrate that companies are made up of human beings, not monsters.
Company's problem, not mine.
>Reading that book outloud to your children violates the T&C
Just because you put it in a contract doesn't make it legally enforceable.
>You do calculate and pay local sales tax on anything you order from out of state?
As a matter of fact...
reply