-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 148
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Reconciling an IP agreement vs. IP provisions in Employment/Contracting contract #78
Comments
@chris-allan in the US, employers will typically provide prospective employees with an offer letter, which is contingent on the employee signing a separate IP assignment agreement (which often also includes confidentiality, non-compete, and non-solicitation terms). In this case, there is no "employment agreement" per se, which is intentional -- it avoids the implication that the employment is anything other than at-will. |
Thanks, @copiesofcopies. The BEIPA is the best public representation of the intents we want to convey. As constructed it may just not work well outside the US. We're global so trying to rationalize US, UK, and EU employment law and IP policy into a consistent and cohesive set of language that we can confidently reuse has been quite a challenge. |
Thanks to everyone for all the previous and ongoing hard work on the documents here!
The README notes:
and...
Every employee or contractor is going to be signing an employment or contracting contract. These documents almost always contain IP provisions. These documents are referenced in the BEIPA:
Is it the community's and by extension GitHub's experience that employment contracts they are using do not contain any IP provisions? Based on the statements above, are we collectively assuming they are at odds with each other? If not, does the community have experience integrating the terms in the BEIPA into employment contracts (one document seems highly preferrable to two)? If they are expected to be at odds with each other does the community have experience with dispute resolution to share?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: