LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for TEAM-ADA Archives


TEAM-ADA Archives

TEAM-ADA Archives


TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TEAM-ADA Home

TEAM-ADA Home

TEAM-ADA  January 1998

TEAM-ADA January 1998

Subject:

Re: Developing Ada stuff for the community

From:

"Robert C. Leif, Ph.D." <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Robert C. Leif, Ph.D.

Date:

Sun, 11 Jan 1998 14:48:23 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (85 lines)

To: Mike, Jerry et al.
From: Bob Leif

The entire US intellectual property law when it comes to the development of
software or inventions is a mess. For instance, inventors are the one
occupation singled out in the US constitution. Ben Franklin probably was
looking out for his interests.  However, the rights of inventors in the US
vs their employers are joke. The German law is much better.

It is obvious to the readers of this list that the public interest would be
benefited by eliminating the slave contracts for software developers,
inventors, and other creative individuals. The very same reasons that these
contracts were declared invalid for the actors and athletes are sufficient
for us.  Standard corporate practices provide monopoly advantages for
intellectual property. The elimination of these standard contract clauses
would also provide a very strong disincentive to forcing employees to take
early retirement.

Historically, the membership of the intellectual professions started with
the medieval monks.  I suspect that many of you do not believe that your
profession should require vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience.
Frankly, I am against all three.

Yours, Bob Leif

At 06:29 PM 1/10/98 -0500, you wrote:
>[said Jerry]
>
>> Most contracts over here specify that the employer owns everything his
>> employee writes, regardless of any circumstances.
>
>That is, from where I sit, outrageous. We are programmers and writers,
>not slaves. They do not own us and it is ridiculous for employers
>to assume they can control our nights and weekends and vacations.
>
>A job is not indentured servitude; employers get away with this
>because we let them get away with it. It is fine with me for
>companies to prevent conflicts of interest - obviously no company
>wants its employees to compete with it after hours. But this is
>VERY different from asserting ownership of our after-hours work.
>
>> Although I have special permission to publish small educational
>> programs, it is currently a major stumbling block in getting an 'Ada
>> programming for NT' book on the road.
>
>I realize I sit in a very different position from non-academics,
>but academic organizations typically go to great lengths to clarify
>conflict-of-interest regulations, and damn well understand the
>difference between conflicts and intellectual property ownership.
>My own employer has an elaborate document that details not only
>this difference, but sets out some very careful internal procedures
>to resolve alleged violations by employees.
>
>I'd have to be pretty desperate for a job to sign away my rights to
>do whatever I please after hours, as I long as I do not compete with
>my employer. Faced with such a clause in a contract, I would cross it
>out and initial the change, and walk away if my would-be employer refused
>to allow the change. Good people will find good jobs with good employers.
>
>I have walked away from some interesting consulting contracts
>because I simply would not accept their absurd contract terms.
>
>In one recent case, the client insisted not only on a non-disclosure
>clause (reasonable and expected) and a non-conflict clause (generally OK),
>but also a requirement that _I_ disclose my other clients to _them_.
>I crossed out the clause, saying that if I disclosed this, I would
>violate _other_ clients' nondisclosures!  They had some nerve to
>demand this from me. I figured it was boilerplate and they would
>agree to cross it out.
>
>Surprise! The bureaucrats refused to accept the change. I walked away.
>Oddly, this brilliant company explained that if I were a _company_
>instead of an individual, they would allow the company to keep its
>other clients' names confidential. Bizarre. Truly bizarre.
>
>You'd recognize the name of the company, but my lips are sealed.:-)
>>
>> -- Jerry van Dijk | Leiden, Holland
>> -- Consultant     | Team Ada
>> -- Ordina Finance | [log in to unmask]
>>
>Mike Feldman
>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
June 2007
May 2007
March 2007
February 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager