A friend said I could retell this, if I kept it anonymous:
bloop doesn't release code because the executive levels can't
differentiate between things merely used and produced as a byproduct and things
integral to its business. glurpp was something just like that -
written at work to support some business requirements but I was told to pretend
that I'd invented it myself and during off hours. I could then release the code
and bypass the executive constipation.
Sad. I'm not sure if there's a (legal and satisfying) solution to this.
At one job I worked, I was annoyed to find some buggy code which wasn't in our source code repository. I fixed the code and added it to the repository only to have a coworker immediately remove it. I asked him what was going on. He said that if we committed it to CVS, the company would say it was their's and he wouldn't be allowed to release it to the CPAN, even though it has nothing to do with the company's core business.
That code is still not on the CPAN and, last I heard, still not in that company's source code repository, despite their relying on the code every day.
similar problem...
rjbs on 2007-03-17T14:45:10
When I started at a previous job, upon being hired I was asked to sign a "standard" confidentiality agreement. It said that any product, document, process, procedure, or idea that I came up with, whether in the office or not, whether on the clock or not, whether asked to produce it by the company or not, whether it related to my job function or not, whether intended for the company or not, belonged to the company, if they decided it was of use to them.
So, if I had a dream about a better mousetrap, and we had mice, that dream belonged to the company.
I refused to sign the agreement and nobody cared. Just think, if I hadn't, there might be no Games::Nintendo::Mario on the CPAN.Re:similar problem...
bart on 2007-03-18T12:58:09
When it was time for me to sign the contract with the company I now work for, there were similar clauses on the back of the contract. I asked them to change the terms, so I don't get up in the same trouble as Tilly had about Perlmonks some years ago. They changed the terms so that they can't claim any ownership on any development I did that is unrelated to the job's business. Since now, at least, they don't automatically own everything I come up up with, and they now can't have "my stuff" without a legal battle, it was good enough for me.