Re: Call for lawyers: GPL Intelectual property protection

[Matthew Schlegel <nitehawk@1ststep.net>]

On Fri Oct 30 15:50:49 1998, john@dhh.gt.org rambled into the ether:
> Here is the part I cut:
> 
>   ...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.
> 
> This says that if he got the idea from work he did for them they own it
> even if it doesn't have anything to do with their business.  Read the whole
> thing from the beginning and carefully parse the double negatives.
> 
> To be his an idea must:
>  a) be developed using nothing of theirs,
>  b) be developed entirely on his time, 
>  c) not relate in any way to their business, and 
>  d) not result from anything he did for them.
> 
> It boils down to this: they own all the software he develops while he works
> there.  He cannot contribute to any free software project while employed
> there without getting a signed release from them.  He should not write one
> line of code on his project unless he can get them to waive their rights to
> it.
> 
> This is why the FSF requires all that "silly paperwork".

Thanks for the help Everyone.

Can anyone give any recommendations that may help me get a waiver to work on any
GPL license software (perhaps it could be constrained to GPL software not in 
competition to NT5 (group I will be in))?  I don't particularly want to try to 
get them to waive rights to my mud src specifically as that would most likely 
draw unwanted attention to the mud server and end up resulting in them taking
it when they may not have otherwise thought about it.

Thanks in advance
	Matthew Schlegel