I want to create a hobby project and release it under MIT. I work as a developer professionally and i have some clauses in my employment contract that gives any IP to my employer. My employer is open to amending these and/or adding exceptions for specific projects. Can anyone point to guidance resources on how to formulate such exceptions properly?
// EDIT: My contract is not totally strict, it refers to applicable laws and the wording is something like ‘knowledge gained through company activities belong to the company’, which is probably intentionally vague. Also: i like my job and employer and they are open to FOSS. My only concern is whether some higherups might disagree at a later point which is why i want to get the wording right. Will not spend money on a lawyer - it’s not that important to me. Thanks for sharing your experiences so far.
CC image ref.: https://thebluediamondgallery.com/legal/employment-contract.html
If the project isn't related to what you do at work, you don't do it on company time, and you don't use company hardware, you're most likely fine.
You're still liable if you've used knowledge gained at work. The safest way is to let your employer sign off every release you want to make public.
Not sure why youre getting downvoted, you are right. If you got access to knowledge via your job that has nothing to do with your job and use that knowledge, youre fucked.
For example, you work in a team that makes a ecommerce website, and have access to the wms team's files. In those files you read about barcodes and their rules/parsing specs, some of those files are only to be read under a contract. Making anything related to the barcodes, even in your own time and equipment, is a nono.
Trust me, ive been in the grey zone and have contacted lawyers about it.
The first sentence is false. The second sentence is debatable.
Why false? Especially if you have signed NDA. There are certain confidential documents you can only access as an employee at work, like the Airplay protocol. If you work for Apple, memorize the standard, then develop an app for Android which casts audio to Homepod, you're going to get sued.
That's true, the problem with the original statement is that it is too broadly scoped by "knowledge", implying that it is any and all knowledge. If I obtain the knowledge to write a singleton in object oriented programming while at work - even if the concept is applied to a work project, and later use the programming concept of a singleton in my own software, then they can't do shit.
A simpler example that shows that it's too broadly scoped is that if I get trained and certified to use a forklift for a job, and later start my own company and have to use a forklift, there is no precedent for my original employer to come after me for using a forklift in my business operation just because I learned how to use a forklift while I worked for them.
If the knowledge is proprietary or copyrighted or a trade secret and what I do uses any of that, or what I produce is a 1 to 1 product of that, then they can come after me.