Programming

17441 readers

243 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

snowe

Ategon

[email protected]

I wrote a program for my boss. How legal is to to write the program again and make it FOSS? (lemm.ee)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/programming

77 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I told my boss I had an idea for a program that could improve efficiency across much of the business, and he let me build it on company time. In the long term, he wanted to be able to sell it to other companies. However, the program never got implemented due to personnel mismanagement, and I'd rather be able to post it on my github under a free licence so I can use it as a resume item, and at least someone would have the chance to actually use it. It's all still in my head, and I could write it again if I wanted. If I do, is it illegal to publish it? What if I write it in a different language? Do I need to change the variable names? I did plenty of research and planning on company time to build it, and it's not like I can research it again, it's all still in my head.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] BB_C 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Meh, everyone scaring you into thinking you don't own your own mind.

Assuming your boss is not the dangerous kind (beyond legal threats), and if the goal is to make it FOSS, then do it using an alias first. Do it differently. Use components/libs/algos from other people at first, even if they are not perfect. Make those parts easily pluggable/replaceable which would be good design anyway. The code then wouldn't be wholly yours, not even your alias self.

You can join the project later with your real identity as an interested domain expert (maybe a bit after not working for the same boss). Start contributing. Become a maintainer. And maybe take over after a while. You can start replacing non-optimal components/libs/algos with better ones piecemeal.

Oh, and if Rust wasn't the choice of implementation, use it this time.

[–] 0x0 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also, don't use company hardware; don't do it during working hours (especially commits - if you're paranoid, use tor) either; resist the temptation of giving the old code a look, do it from memory.

[–] BB_C 8 points 1 year ago

don’t do it during working hours (especially commits - if you’re paranoid, use tor)

I wanted to mention not using personal emails or committing from home IP addresses, but thought that was needless to say.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Going to such lengths suggests this is morally the wrong thing to do.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

"Make those parts pluggable/replaceable which would be a good design anyways".

Following best practices = Morally Wrong?
Sure, fren, whatever you say.

The only reason OP might not have done it this way in the first place would have been to save the company worrying about licensing, or getting shitty with OP about not using enough orignal/proprietary code to ensure lock-in with future clients ... is THAT somehow morally superior in your book?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I just mean that the amount of subterfuge that's been suggested in this thread suggests these people feel that something's wrong. You don't normally have to go to such lengths to hide your identity on GitHub.

Let's be honest, deciding later that code they wrote for someone should be repurposed behind their back is rather underhanded. And making it open source rather than spinning their own company doesn't make it more palatable.

[–] Blackthorn 3 points 1 year ago

I'd say it suggests it's "legally" the wrong thing to do.