TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Bumble claims IP rights on employee's open-source libs

605 点作者 giansegato超过 3 年前

51 条评论

cassianoleal超过 3 年前
Many years ago I had a job offer at Badoo in the UK. After many rounds of going back-and-forth with the contract, me trying to better understand certain clauses, them going back to the lawyers, etc. I told them I&#x27;d be happy to sign if they removed the caluses that stated pretty much anything I created on or off hours belonged to them.<p>They went back to the lawyers and came back to me saying that this is not the first time this has been brought up, that the contract was standard across the org and was originally written for managerial types and C-suites, and that the company had never even considered taking over an employee&#x27;s off-hours work, open source or otherwise.<p>I said good, then it should not be a problem to remove the clause. They said they would have another discussion and would really like it for me to join. I said great, then once you issue me a contract with that clause I&#x27;ll be happy to join, assuming I hadn&#x27;t found something else.<p>They never came back to me. For years I wondered if anything had actually changed. Reading this tweet I&#x27;m glad I declined.
评论 #29453791 未加载
评论 #29449093 未加载
评论 #29454279 未加载
评论 #29451291 未加载
评论 #29449084 未加载
评论 #29454611 未加载
评论 #29449442 未加载
评论 #29453592 未加载
评论 #29454876 未加载
评论 #29450622 未加载
评论 #29454327 未加载
评论 #29454355 未加载
评论 #29453636 未加载
评论 #29451297 未加载
评论 #29451240 未加载
marcinzm超过 3 年前
A note to Bumble, this makes me not want to work for you or anyone who is currently in a related leadership position at Bumble (ie: eng leadership, etc.). Given the lack of supply in engineering the bad publicity is going to cost you more than any miniscule gain.<p>edit: And I don&#x27;t even publish OSS anymore but if you&#x27;re willing to go after an employee for something this petty what else would you go after them for.
评论 #29450040 未加载
评论 #29449883 未加载
评论 #29453822 未加载
评论 #29449729 未加载
评论 #29450904 未加载
kgeist超过 3 年前
Here in Russia Rambler tried to do the same with nginx, and they failed to achieve their goals. I don&#x27;t know, it creates nothing but bad publicity without giving anything in return considering they won&#x27;t maintain it anyway if the core devs leave (and nothing stops them from forking and creating their commercial solution right now). The image of Rambler before: &quot;Igor Sysoev created nginx while working at Rambler&quot; (positive association). The image now: &quot;Igor Sysoev created nginx in his spare time and he just happened to work for Rambler at the time and Rambler tried to take away his project by SWATing their office&quot;. It&#x27;s like some pointless greed (&quot;it&#x27;s mine!!&quot;) above all pragmatism.
评论 #29448505 未加载
评论 #29448701 未加载
评论 #29448566 未加载
评论 #29448670 未加载
评论 #29449038 未加载
评论 #29448659 未加载
notacoward超过 3 年前
I worked for a company once that had this sort of &quot;we own everything&quot; IP clause. They tried to get me to sign it after I had already started. I crossed out that part, initialed the change, and sent it back unsigned. Ended up going back and forth a few times, and then it got dropped behind a desk or something and we all forgot about it. Not surprisingly, I suppose, that company turned out to be a bit of a mess for other reasons. When I went to leave several months later, I got a note from the CFO&#x27;s admin.<p>&quot;We don&#x27;t seem to have a copy of your employee agreement on file. Could you please sign the attached copy and return it?&quot;<p>Haha, no. What are they going to do, fire me? I went down and explained the situation to her, and we had a good laugh. Never did sign. All of the company&#x27;s own IP turned out to be worthless BTW, and they were lucky they didn&#x27;t get sued for misappropriating IP from the CTO&#x27;s previous employer (DEC). Companies doing this is a huge red flag not only because of its grasping nature but because it often reveals a general kind of awfulness among its principals and&#x2F;or backers.
评论 #29449904 未加载
评论 #29453716 未加载
评论 #29457116 未加载
_6lik超过 3 年前
This thing has been bugging me the first time signed an employment contract years ago.<p>So from what I understand is that everything I do on conpany property (that includes coding in a pub but on the company laptop) belongs to the company.<p>So what I do is to first code it (any new idea that I&#x27;m working on) at home on my personal setup (including cloud an all). Then I release everything on a Apache V2 + MIT combo with CC BY SA 4 (for pics, vids etc) that I think covers everything.<p>Then I host it under a github organisation (I am the admin of the org but the code is not hosted directly in my profile). Then I go back to the office next morning and ask one of the junior team members to fork it.<p>In my head, I&#x27;m thinking that yeah well, I wrote something in my personal capacity somewhere and then somebody from the company forked it, so that&#x27;s not my problem.<p>So far so good... And the department is too much dependent on me so avoids any confrontation anyway. But I have always wondered, if this is fool proof? Can somebody find any loopholes in this approach and make it better...
评论 #29453976 未加载
评论 #29454113 未加载
评论 #29454123 未加载
评论 #29454026 未加载
评论 #29453971 未加载
评论 #29454078 未加载
评论 #29454013 未加载
评论 #29466007 未加载
PragmaticPulp超过 3 年前
As an employee, I’ve managed to evade these clauses by negotiating them as early as possible in the interview process. With smaller companies, it hasn’t really been as difficult as I expected.<p>However, my local laws provide some additional protection against this type of thing. I didn’t even realize it until I consulted with a lawyer who pointed out that my state’s laws don’t allow companies to claim IP generated in off hours. Of course, consult with a lawyer to confirm which jurisdiction actually applies to your employment.<p>As a manager on the other side of the table, I’ve had some strange experiences: On more than one occasion, employees have tried to open-source things they wrote for us without asking. Juniors especially may not fully understand the bounds of IP ownership, to the point that they think code they wrote is theirs, even if written for their job as paid works for hire. I’m not suggesting that’s what’s happening here, but after seeing developers walk straight into situations where they’re releasing company code without permission I reserve judgment when I see situations like this. If these libraries were developed on company time for company work products then the developer may not have a particularly strong claim for his ownership.<p>On the other hand, if these are entirely unreleased to his work then of course this is a ridiculous request.<p>EDIT: A quick look at the source code suggests this situation might not be as clear-cut in favor of the developer as the comments here suggest. Both of the repos in question appear to be derivative works of projects that Badoo (aka Bumble, the developer&#x27;s employer) owns. The MVIKotlin library opens with this statement:<p>&gt; This project is inspired by Badoo MVICore library.<p>And the Decompose repo has this statement in the opening:<p>&gt; This project is inspired by Badoos RIBs fork of the Uber RIBs framework.<p>And unless I&#x27;m missing something, the developer worked for Badoo (Bumble) during the entire period. It would be extremely difficult to argue that a derivative work of your employer&#x27;s IP, written during your time of employment and possibly during work time, is fully independent of the company. If the developer used these projects in any way for their work at Bumble (e.g. actually using these tools or libraries as part of the app) or he used company equipment&#x2F;time&#x2F;resources while building them, then it would be virtually impossible to argue that these works were <i>not</i> partially work-for-hire as part of his employment.
评论 #29449686 未加载
amanaplanablog超过 3 年前
I&#x27;ve always had a ploy I used to avoid this to a degree. When joining a company you have to fill out &quot;prior inventions&quot;. I generally list a number of names and general vague descriptions. The catch is, none of them exist they are simply invented in my head.<p>When building a side project I use one of the names from my prior inventions list.
btrettel超过 3 年前
Amusing previous HN comment on this sort of problem (not from me):<p>&gt; I&#x27;ve always thought that if a company claims rights over what you do outside worktime, they should do it not only for your genial ideas, but for the bad ones too. So, if you incur in a stupid debt it must belong to the company. Your newborn baby? The company mus pay alimony. It&#x27;s all or nothing!<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=1113065" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=1113065</a><p>Edit: I found a Slashdot comment that makes the same point:<p>&gt; When the company has a blanket policy that takes the employee&#x27;s inventions, it can come to bite them in the ass.<p>&gt; When I was illegally fired by Microsystems, Inc. (&quot;MSI&quot;) they took possession of work I did on my own time using my own tools. However, on the workers comp. claim their denial was based on the claim the tendinitis was caused in part by my work at home. Either MSI fraudulently denied the workers comp. claim, or committed fraud by asserting and taking possession of the work I did on my own time.<p>&gt; By having a blanket policy of owning everything you do, the employer could be on the hook for everything you do.<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;ask.slashdot.org&#x2F;comments.pl?sid=2667463&amp;cid=39013649" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;ask.slashdot.org&#x2F;comments.pl?sid=2667463&amp;cid=39013649</a>
评论 #29451541 未加载
评论 #29450484 未加载
sdwolfz超过 3 年前
I&#x27;ve asked this before and never got a straight answer, but I&#x27;ll ask again: what exact clauses do I need to modify in the employment contract, and what exactly must they say, in order to avoid this sort of situation? (relevant to UK employment that is). If you&#x27;ve solved this for yourself, please tell us all how and what it&#x27;s written in yours so we can do the same.<p>Here is a link to what my previous employment contract stated about copyright: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=24220800" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=24220800</a> (right now I&#x27;m just a shareholder in a company and not employed). Basically it says employer owns all, and I&#x27;d like that to say something else... but what?
评论 #29448952 未加载
评论 #29448951 未加载
评论 #29448857 未加载
评论 #29448911 未加载
评论 #29448734 未加载
评论 #29448779 未加载
评论 #29448688 未加载
评论 #29448895 未加载
评论 #29451060 未加载
评论 #29449041 未加载
whats-the-hype超过 3 年前
The internet is quick to grab the pitchfork but it looks like there&#x27;s a different story here.<p>If you compare arkann1985&#x27;s MVIKotlin vs badoo&#x2F;MVICore it&#x27;s an understatement to say it was &quot;inspired by&quot;. It looks like an almost identical clone.<p>And as others have pointed out, it&#x27;s not like Bumble is going after all of this guy&#x27;s projects, just the ones where he was &quot;inspired by&quot; company work.<p>It would be difficult to argue that the projects in question would exist without benefiting from his employment at Bumble where the originals were developed.
评论 #29454218 未加载
greatgib超过 3 年前
Here the question is even a little bit more interesting than just the &quot;open source&quot; code you created I think:<p>There is lot of discussion about the ownership of the code, but what about the other things related to the project? Like stars and issues.<p>In no way stars and issues belongs to the company, they belongs to each user that submitted them.<p>They submitted them to the project that was on a specific username. So, I&#x27;m not sure that the company could legally ask to take over that by force without the user agreeing.<p>Imagine if a company ask that &quot;you transfer your likes to us&quot;...
评论 #29448555 未加载
评论 #29448861 未加载
评论 #29448966 未加载
评论 #29449533 未加载
评论 #29448648 未加载
pjc50超过 3 年前
Check. Your. Contracts. It is risky to do open source work without having a written agreement with your employer that exempts it.
评论 #29448537 未加载
评论 #29448407 未加载
kisamoto超过 3 年前
I think the IT industry is filled with broad, vague clauses like this that aim to lay claim to all IP an employee creates (which can include art, music etc. as well).<p>Some employers make the excuse that it&#x27;s only during office hours; others claim that this clause would &quot;never actually be used&quot;.<p>In my experience it is rarely removed. I&#x27;ve turned down jobs because of it and others that I have accepted I have been extremely worried something like this would happen. I feel for the employee in question and hope they are able to retain control of their open-source code. Maybe this bad publicity encourages others to push back in the future because I generally find this behaviour quite unacceptable.
评论 #29450951 未加载
swiftcoder超过 3 年前
Assuming for the moment that their claim is legally sound, what are the practical implications? The code is already published under an open-source license, with multiple other contributors to which they don&#x27;t have an employment relationship...<p>Ownership would allow them to relicense the employees original contributions, but they&#x27;d still need to negotiate with or replace all code by other contributors, and they can&#x27;t un-opensource the existing codebase, right?
评论 #29448236 未加载
评论 #29448726 未加载
activitypea超过 3 年前
The two repos being contested are:<p>1) MVIKotlin - &quot;Extendable MVI framework [...] inspired by Badoo MVICore library&quot;<p>2) Decompose - &quot;Kotlin BLoCs [...] inspired by Badoos RIBs fork of the Uber RIBs framework&quot;<p>I hate corporations more than most people here, but this might be as black and white as the title and comment section imply
评论 #29461477 未加载
neilv超过 3 年前
I posted an Ask HN on employee agreements ~10 months ago (for my previous startup, which was seed-ish stage), but the post got zero traction:<p>* &quot;Ask HN: What should early startup Employee Agreements require, and not?&quot; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=26016445" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=26016445</a><p>If some founder wants to figure out how to do employee agreements better, they could be more equitable, and be more appealing than the scary FAANG document a hiring candidate is comparing it to.
anonymousiam超过 3 年前
I signed away all IP rights to Teledyne (my second job) in 1980. I&#x27;ve worked for three companies since then, and never had to sign anything like that. I&#x27;m pretty sure it&#x27;s unenforceable, but the thing I signed basically said that anything I invent from that point forward, even after leaving Teledyne, would belong to them.
评论 #29468937 未加载
lkramer超过 3 年前
In an earlier role (tech support) they had a clause like that, and I pointed it out and said I wasn&#x27;t happy with that. They asked me to still start the following Monday and promised to get back to me about the contract ASAP. They never did, so I ended up working for them for 2 1&#x2F;2 years without signing a contract... I guess different companies have different priorities...
DarthNebo超过 3 年前
GitHub should try to enable some sort of toggled anonymous mode for select repos, while users should make their FOSS&#x2F;social identities less obvious or decoupled if their employers aren&#x27;t that friendly with such clauses.<p>With remote work becoming more pervasive, employees should really not be doing any personal things on work computers because their traffic is definitely going to be analysed by someone or some system.<p>Just a general reminder as well - Companies&#x2F;Govt&#x27;s would absolutely love for GitHub&#x2F;Gitlab or any social platform to require ID card verification for users if that was on the table.
评论 #29448198 未加载
DoingIsLearning超过 3 年前
I am almost certain that IP law overrides and voids any abusive contract in the UK.<p>Bumble would have to prove in court that the employee did the open source work on either company time or using company resources for this to hold.
评论 #29448132 未加载
评论 #29448104 未加载
buro9超过 3 年前
Under UK law your employer arguably has a claim to your IP if any of the following are true:<p>1) They asked you to work on this as part of your employment<p>2) You worked on this during your employed hours<p>3) You worked on this on employer provided equipment<p>If you can prove that this is an undertaking of your own (especially if it pre-dates employment) and you avoid doing any work (not even replying to Git issues) during work hours, and only ever on your own hardware... then your employer has no grounds for claim at all.
评论 #29453595 未加载
Debugreality超过 3 年前
Generally these kinds of clauses should be viewed as red flags. I had one contract that was something like &quot;We reserve the right to buy all IP from anything you work on while employed here for $1&quot;.<p>I got it removed before joining but looking back it was one of the most toxic placed I&#x27;d ever worked and this was just one of a number of red flags.
评论 #29453934 未加载
hackbinary超过 3 年前
I would counter that this software was created and maintained on your own time, in which case that at the very least you are entitled for consideration for your work and efforts.<p>Employment tribunals and courts take a dim view of wage theft, and that is exactly what this is if your employer is trying to enforce that clause.<p>Get advice from an employment lawyer.
pabs3超过 3 年前
I note that Software Freedom Conservancy advocates renegotiating your contract to retain ownership of code you write for open source projects you work on:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;sfconservancy.org&#x2F;contractpatch&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;sfconservancy.org&#x2F;contractpatch&#x2F;</a>
Clubber超过 3 年前
Spolsky wrote a pretty good article on this very thing.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.joelonsoftware.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;12&#x2F;09&#x2F;developers-side-projects&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.joelonsoftware.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;12&#x2F;09&#x2F;developers-side-pr...</a>
joeyh超过 3 年前
Nothing in the APL requires he transfer the git repos to them. If they own the license, he needs to update the license and copyright statements to match reality, maybe send them a courtesy copy in a tarball or whatever. That&#x27;s all.<p>Copyight cannot demand this ridiculous thing.
评论 #29448931 未加载
rootusrootus超过 3 年前
On a related note, always be careful to look at the documents that come with things like stock grants that you may receive in addition to salary. There is frequently this same kind of legal language there which may not have been in the original employment contract you signed.<p>My current company operates this way. The employment contract was pretty generic and didn&#x27;t really have much IP-related language in it. But the first stock grant had a document that was quite a lot more specific. Fortunately nothing as onerous as described in this Twitter post, but still, it was good that I read all the documents before accepting the grant.
buzzwords超过 3 年前
Does anyone know what is the rational for Bumble to do this?
评论 #29448924 未加载
评论 #29448662 未加载
geofft超过 3 年前
If you wouldn&#x27;t have written the library if it weren&#x27;t for your job, and you use the library to get your job done... it doesn&#x27;t really matter if it&#x27;s open source. If you&#x27;re in a jurisdiction and under an employment contract where your closed-source code is owned by the company, your equivalent open-source code is too.<p>If we&#x27;re talking about hobby projects, that&#x27;s different, but it seems from this tweet that this is something that could have been written internally as part of someone&#x27;s job and never open-sourced, right?
yawnxyz超过 3 年前
I have a slightly unrelated question and I&#x27;m in need of advice:<p>I&#x27;m about to work on a grant, with another PI at University of Sydney for a project we&#x27;ve worked on for four years. This grant is to advance our mission of building software system for supporting personalized bacteriophage therapy. Essentially, we&#x27;re building software to make personalized therapy possible in this space, so we&#x27;re building something critical for the project.<p>We&#x27;re building the software to get funding to &quot;phase 2&quot; which is 50x (8 figures) the amount of money the grant&#x27;s already received. Currently we&#x27;re employed on the project as contract researchers, but we (and our PI) wants us there in Australia in person. Since we&#x27;re based in the US&#x2F;Can, we need to get work visas, which require us to be employed by the grant directly.<p>My question is: we have to sign employment agreements for the university, and our contracts look very much like the &quot;we&#x27;ll take everything you own, including your ideas you came up with in your shower at your own home&quot; kind of contracts. We&#x27;ve already pushed back and laid out our position — we want to be able to continue building this project past the length of employment and past Phase 2, whether we get it or not. I don&#x27;t really care if they get full, perpetual license to whatever I create there; it&#x27;s most likely going to be OSS anyway. I just don&#x27;t want them to prevent us from using it or OSS-ing it in the future.<p>Has anyone else dealt with universities and institutions in this manner? Do they usually operate like companies in this way?
评论 #29461793 未加载
eximius超过 3 年前
My latest job has a <i>somewhat</i> reasonable set of clauses, but I still wanted some of the verbiage changed. I wasn&#x27;t able to get that (&quot;we use standardized contracts across the org&quot;), but they were willing to give me a secondary document explaining the interpretation of the clauses I found troublesome which, to me, is really the same thing.<p>So sometimes changing the wording isn&#x27;t the only way to get your goal. Amendments&#x2F;clarifications in writing can work.
ToddWBurgess超过 3 年前
I know from talking to an IP lawyer, IP law has less to do with who is right and more about who has the deep pockets to afford an IP dispute.
mellosouls超过 3 年前
I don&#x27;t know the history of the development, and I&#x27;m instinctively against overreach by employers but considering both repos are clearly influenced by repos on similar platforms (eg Badoo), it doesn&#x27;t seem unreasonable for Bumble to at least take an interest in their provenance and - if they have been developed on company time and equipment - their ownership.
评论 #29448607 未加载
评论 #29448597 未加载
dbg31415超过 3 年前
I do all of my side work under an alias, just to keep this from happening.<p>Making it one-step harder for lawyers is generally all it takes.<p>Don&#x27;t draw lines from your GitHub account that you use at work to the GitHub account that holds your side projects.<p>Every time I start with a new company, I spin up a new GitHub account just for that company.<p>Sorry this happened to you.
评论 #29450797 未加载
Buttons840超过 3 年前
I&#x27;ve always wondered what would happen if a OSS library had accepted contributions from others?<p>Let&#x27;s say me and a friend develop a library together, then my company asks for ownership of it. Sorry, I can&#x27;t legally do that, because I myself only own half the code.
pawelwentpawel超过 3 年前
Did any of you ever request an example contract that would be signed before starting to go through a marathon of interviews or even negotiating an offer?<p>Finding a non-negotiable blanket clause like this in a contract would most probably stop me from taking the interviews or at least establish completely different salary expectations. I would understand if the work would be done on company&#x27;s equipment or during some allocated time but a blanket one like this? If you&#x27;re not paying me for 168 hours per week and there is no clear conflict of interest, bug off from my side projects I do in my own time.
评论 #29451341 未加载
dehrmann超过 3 年前
What&#x27;s the status of the license on this? The author made it Apache, but Bumble is making claims on it because of the employee&#x27;s contract. It wasn&#x27;t the employee&#x27;s to release in the first place (as per the contract), but once it&#x27;s out there, did the employee essentially open source it as an rogue agent of the company? At the same time, a Microsoft employee can&#x27;t open source Windows and just say &quot;oops.&quot;<p>As a developer using open source code, how can you <i>ever</i> have enough certainty that an open source project won&#x27;t run into issues like this?
rainmaking超过 3 年前
Well I can see that now someone has a hiring problem in the near future.
StefanoC超过 3 年前
Seems to me that the most important questions have barely been asked (I saw just one scrolling through that Twitter feed, unanswered): 1) Was any work done during time paid by the company? 2) Also, but I&#x27;d be flexible with this one, was work equipment used? 3) Was the developer able to produce this work thanks to what he learned from proprietary systems, at work?<p>It&#x27;s easy to grab the pitchfork, I hate that contract clause as all of you do, but without clear information on the above this case could go either way.
game_the0ry超过 3 年前
UPDATE - twitter&#x2F;@arkann1985 was just hired by Google [1]. Well done, Arkaddii, and fuck you to Bumble.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;arkann1985&#x2F;status&#x2F;1467914399381925888" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;arkann1985&#x2F;status&#x2F;1467914399381925888</a>
RamblingCTO超过 3 年前
IANAL but I think at least in Germany that doesn&#x27;t hold in court. I&#x27;m surprised by what (not specific to bumble) US companies get away with and that people can basically sell their lives.
michael7463超过 3 年前
Since the original tweet is deleted, here is an archived copy: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.md&#x2F;NvaFR" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.md&#x2F;NvaFR</a>
eterevsky超过 3 年前
There was a discussion about a similar clause in employee contracts with Google Switzerland. Turns out such conditions are illegal according to Swiss law, and the clause was dropped.
ChrisMarshallNY超过 3 年前
This is the infamous &quot;shower clause&quot; (Like they own the ideas that you come up with, in the shower).<p>I am very glad that I never had one, with the company that employed me, for a long time.
justshowpost超过 3 年前
Just imagine you hiring someone just to play with his Ruby pet projects all day long...
questiondev超过 3 年前
never worked for a tech company outside of projects or contracts i’ve done for people i know and my own ventures (small ventures), i’ve coded since i was 9 years old, started out in BASIC then took up pascal but now code (or script) javascript&#x2F;react and have been looking into firms to work for, the stuff that was brought up to me made me feel like i have to protect my off the clock source code. the only reason why i was looking into working for someone else was to raise enough money to finish bootstrapping an unrelated startup. looks like my fears are valid
bicepjai超过 3 年前
I can’t see the tweet. Ant links or images ?
game_the0ry超过 3 年前
The repos in question have Apache licenses, v2.0. What is stopping me from cloning and pushing both to my own public github repo, with the same license?
arpa超过 3 年前
and this is why i commit to my outside-work projects using another identity and during off work hours.
quiffledwerg超过 3 年前
Bumble gave him a cake for five years service recently, so the company can’t be that bad really.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;arkann1985&#x2F;status&#x2F;1446071099989663745?s=21" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;arkann1985&#x2F;status&#x2F;1446071099989663745?s=...</a><p>Surely we can overlook the whole “give us your damn open source personal projects copyright grab or you’ll be chewing on big legal problems buddy” thing given the companies generosity with cake?<p>The cake shows that Bumble really are good people.<p>Reminds me of those famous words “speak softly and carry a big cake”.
评论 #29449423 未加载
评论 #29449709 未加载
beervirus超过 3 年前
&gt; I will need to fork repos to continue my work.<p>Uhhhh… if the employer owns it, it presumably isn’t going to be licensed as open source.