Since we're talking about Google being less than nice towards its workers, here's a fun little story from my days there. There were two things that I really didn't like about Google at the time: The Google+ saga (realnames et al), and the IP ownership policy.
-
Show this thread
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @zecke42
... but why would you be entitled to solutions that occurred outside from work if you weren't paying for that time? (Talking about copyright, not patents)
1 reply 0 retweets 12 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @zecke42
If you're working on company code then by default the company owns it, that's not under dispute. Such a clause is entirely reasonable. The problem is when it's work *not* related to the company.
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
There is no real problem. If it's a personal project, then if the company is using it / relying on it, they're already licensing it and have some arrangement. If they aren't they don't care. And if it's third party open source and they use it they also don't have to care.
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes
The important part is the distinction between company owned code and some vague "related to business the company is doing" nonsense.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.