[Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL

[greg at freephile.com (Greg Rundlett (freephile))]

On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Mike Small <smallm at panix.com> wrote:

> "Greg Rundlett (freephile)" <greg at freephile.com> writes:
> > Assignment of copyright (to the FSF) is NOT automatic.  It's something
> you
> > have to do (another hurdle in making software free, AND defensible).
>
> One interesting thing to me about copyright assignment and the paperwork
> some GNU projects require for it is how it could bring to a head how
> grasping the wording of your company's "invention assignment agreement"
> is.  The company I work for happens to be based out of California, so
> their policy on this filters through a certain California labour law,
> one that leaves room for a person to contribute to free software as long
> as it isn't done on company time or facilities. (Er, there may be a
> little more in there about whether you're directly competing with your
> company's direct business or something like that but it's a pretty nice
> law all the same as I recall.)  Massachusetts, as far as I know, has no
> law like it. I wonder about this when I think about moving on. I don't
> think companies are necessarily trying to be jerks about it. But without
> a law you have to think lawyers over time are going to opt for the
> maximal position for their clients, one that says they own everything
> you do night or day while they pay you. I wonder how many patches are
> flying around under this kind of contract.
>
> Can't imagine the law improving here anytime soon either. Maybe if
> Senator Brownsberger ever gets his anti-compete reform through he could
> be persuaded to take this one up?  But even that, being modest and fair
> as seems to me his way, has been largely stonewalled by interested
> parties, yes?
>
>
I've written quite a bit about this
https://freephile.org/wiki/index.php/Copyright  That wiki article describes
the practices of leading free software foundations and how they treat
contributions.

I haven't kept up lately with the local politics but do know that CA has
some of the most reasonable (pro person) legislation for non-competes and
"Intellectual Property" (sic).  I really hope that reform in the
non-compete area is enacted in MA because it's been proven to help
innovation and technology investment.  An interesting note on this subject
is that Dyn (one of the most successful Internet companies in New England)
recently announced that they would abandon non-compete clauses in their
employment contracts.
http://www.inc.com/jeremy-hitchcock/competing-against-non-competes.html

One of the most knowledgeable legal sources I know is Andy Updegrove
http://www.gesmer.com/industries.php?IndustryID=18 and his website
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/metalibrary/#.VSfvrky9_J8 which may provide
details than I've compiled on the subject.