HN Explorer

Ask HN: Why is it acceptable for a employers to (think they) own my free time?

11 points by AgentConundrum ↗ HN
This is something I've been quietly getting stressed out about for quite some time. I'm currently unemployed, but reading posts on HN and reddit has me concerned about my future as a developer.

I've seen a lot of posts concerning non-compete agreements, and the concept that anything you work on belongs to your employer, not you. As someone who likes to tinker, this scares me.

I'm not saying I'm going to create something that becomes the next Facebook, or even the next Bingo Card Creator. I'm unlike most people here in that I'm risk averse (and self-conscious) to the point of being afraid to start my own business, but I do like to tinker. I've had a number of ideas, ones that mostly don't finish because I get enchanted by my next idea and move on too soon, but I do have the goal of publicly releasing things if they ever finish. I just like to play with code.

I worry, after reading certain posts, that just playing with code, and especially releasing things in public, is playing with fire in this industry. I worry about starting anything because I don't want to get a job and have to kill my project because I hate the idea of some other company being able to swoop in and claim my IP. Maybe these sorts of agreements aren't as popular as I've been led to believe, but the idea still scares me.

What finally led to this post was a comment thread on reddit[1], where someone wanted advice about taking a job with PayPal. One piece of advice was to be wary of these sorts of NCAs, and I commented on it, basically stating there what I'm stating now - these sorts of agreements scare me. I got one reply[2] which said (paraphrased), "if you're working outside the job, then you're not fully committed to me". Statements like this make me want to go dig ditches for a living so that I can keep coding as a hobby without fear.

I'm young and naive, so I definitely assume I'm overthinking and overcomplicating this whole deal, but I don't understand why anyone would give up their every thought to a company.

Can someone shed some light on this? Are these agreements common? Why does anyone agree to them? How can I get a job without being worried about writing an answer on StackOverflow and not getting fired/sued for it?

[1] http://www.reddit.com/r/PHP/comments/mwnva/just_got_a_job_offer_out_of_the_blue_from_paypal/

[2] http://www.reddit.com/r/PHP/comments/mwnva/just_got_a_job_offer_out_of_the_blue_from_paypal/c34in7o?context=3

13 comments

[ 4.7 ms ] story [ 41.4 ms ] thread
dtwwtd
I also enjoy creating small projects and would not enjoy being in the position of not being able to work on them or not being able to to release them. Even though nobody else may really care about what I do, I enjoy the ability to talk about or write about my projects without worry of losing writes to them or being fired.

I'm still a student so I haven't held many jobs yet, but of the ones that I have I have always been able to work on my own projects without worry. What I work on while at work or in the time I say that I will be working becomes the property of my employer and otherwise I can work on what I please (as long as I don't disclose confidential information).

From what I have observed, it comes down to the values of the company and how they wish to handle this issue. It is possible to find work at a company that is fine with you working on other projects on your own time (open source or otherwise). You may also be able to negotiate it in the terms of your employment or even be able to find a company willing to pay you to work on open source projects.

On the other hand, there are companies that really don't want you working on your own projects. I suppose that there are people that are okay with this or want to work at these companies enough that they are willing to sacrifice that freedom.

These are mainly observations of both of my personal experiences and those of people I know for whatever they're worth but I do believe you can find a job where your projects are not an issue.

paulhauggis
They are less common if you get a job where development or software isn't their main business.

I was the lead developer at a company where I primarily worked on their e-commerce site.

The only NDA I signed was related to their core business. They didn't care about any of my side projects as long as it wasn't in direct competition.

But, these sorts of jobs are usually less fulfilling/interesting.

bjelkeman-again
Which is one of many reasons I personally really like working with an organisation which releases everything it does open source.
devs1010
Its an idealistic goal but not practical in the cases of companies who have specific niche web applications, etc as obviously then anyone wouldn't have to pay for use of the application
bjelkeman-again
We develop a very specific niche web app which we charge for running even if it free and open software. We live of it, all 15 of us who work with it. So for us it is practical.
throw_away
my understanding of the matter is that companies do this so that you can't turn around and say "hey, I thought of this main idea of one of your major components in my off time. $$, please.", especially after you've left the company. even companies that have draconian sounding policies often have reasonable procedures for release and common sense policies around commenting on the Internet.

if you're concerned, just make sure you ask at your interview. it will make you sound good and stands as a reasonable bozo filter with regard to the company, for your sake.

sixtofour
"if you're working outside the job, then you're not fully committed to me".

And if you're not working outside the job, then you're not fully committed to your career.

And for that matter, why should anyone be fully committed to a job? Life is more than a job, and most lives last longer than most jobs.

codeonfire
Any employer would have to sue you first and win a judgement, and that would only happen if you became super wealthy. The other thing that is on your side is that anyone vindictive enough is going to be too stupid to pull it off or even understand what your side project is or does. If it's an unenforceable non-compete, who cares? If it's a moonlighting agreement, don't talk about your hobby at work. Above all, realize that people who say stuff like "you're not fully committed to me" are unprofessional idiots. As far as code you create is concerned, it's worthless. Give it away freely. If you give a physics book to a five year old are they going to build a particle accelerator? The real value is the developer as knowledge can't be given away and slavery is illegal.
AgentConundrum
That makes sense to a point, but it's still scary to have that sort of thing hanging over you. This will sound silly, but just thinking about this stuff has my stomach in knots right now - I actually feel physically ill.

After posting this, I found a post on answers.onstartups[1], written by Joel Spolsky, which outlined the reasons why employers make you sign this sort of thing. I understand the reasons he gave, but it also makes me realize that this is just the way the world works for our profession, and I feel trapped and scared by it.

I know I'm never going to make anything in my spare time that amounts to anything, but I still like the idea of throwing stuff (pet projects) at the wall (the internet) to see what sticks (gains me notoriety and/or profit). I get the feeling that it's in my own best interest to just keep my toys to myself, keep my head down, and pound out line of business apps for $50k a year (or the post-inflation equivalent of it) for the rest of my life. I feel dead inside.

[1] http://answers.onstartups.com/q/19422/14789

fractallyte
More than anything else, you're suffering from a lack of self-confidence.

Try to be really good at what you do, and use that knowledge to build your confidence and assertiveness. This is the subject of countless books, and several past threads on HN.

On a more interesting note, it's surprising/shocking to realize how far one can get with controlled arrogance. An archetypal character to study is the protagonist of the TV series 'House'. (But I'm not at all suggesting that you should behave like him!)

hugo31370
Everything can be negotiated, and non-competes are no exception. A non-compete can be more or less restrictive. Everytime I sign one I try to make sure it's reasonable. That means that you should agree not to compete in the same space you're working on. Everything broader than that you should try to negotiate.

So for any non-compete that reads "anything you do on your free time belongs to the company" you should try your best not to sign it. Negotiate! It makes sense. If you work for facebook and you're building an alternative social network on your spare time, it's reasonable for facebook to claim ownership (because you're likely using inside information). If you're developing a new music distribution software, then you should be ok.

The commitment discussion is secondary. Either you perform according to expectations or you don't. If you don't, the company can fire you. Non-competes are not tools to measure your performance. That's my understanding and the argument I'd use to negotiate non-competes. Non-competes regulate IP. Labor law regulates performance (i.e. commitment).

ramblerman
I can understand not having the drive to try.

But 'Risk averse' and 'unemployed' in Software don't make much sense to me. What risk are you talking about exactly. The risk of failure?