Re: Call for lawyers: GPL Intelectual property protection

[Tom Lear <tom@trap.mtview.ca.us>]

On 30 Oct 1998, Ben Pfaff wrote:

> Hamish Moffatt <hamish@debian.org> writes:
> 
> 
>    It reads to me like anything at all you do while being employed by Microsoft,
>    if at all related to Microsoft's business (ie software), even if developed
>    completely in your own time, on your own hardware, at your own cost,
>    not using any secrets learnt at Microsoft, they still have a right to
>    that work. This seems to mean they would have license to the code if
>    they wanted it, and you have to keep records, designs, drawings etc,
>    of it for them. Even if the software is GPL, you as author have the right
>    to issue it also under another license, and they could force you to do that.
> 
> No, read the second paragraph of that clause again:
> 
>    The previous paragraph of this Agreement does not apply to any invention for
>    which no equipment, supplies, facility, or trade secret information of the
>    Company or Client was used and which was developed entirely on Employee's own
>    time, and (a) which does not relate to the business of the Company or Client
                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  
>    or to the Company's or Client's actual or demonstrably anticipated research or
>    development, or (b) which does not result from any work performed for the
>    Company or Client.
> 
> If he's careful not to do development on Microsoft's machines or on
> Microsoft's time, he should be okay.

"which does not relate to the business of the Company", ie. Software and
Hardware.
							- Tom