Apple has forced one of its employees to halt development of a popular shareware application, sources confirmed to Think Secret. Last month, the developer stopped sales and downloads of Netflix Fanatic after Apple claimed ownership over the source code. On other Apple-related news, Fink 0.6.2 released.
Netflix Fanatic: Apple Strikes Back at Employee’s Shareware App
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Reminds me of what happened to Kenny Carruthers when he went to work at Apple and they wouldn’t allow him to sell Postmaster for BeOS anymore. It seems odd to me, as it makes Apple look like the Big Bad Corporation when it doesn’t have to.
As a loyal Apple customer, stories like these make me sad. While it’s not entirely unexpected that a business corporation would try to strong-arm its employees like this, the fact that Apple puts on this “Think Different” facade makes one want to believe that Apple truly does want to Think Different. I guess that pertains to product focus, not business relationships.
Jared
I like Apple a lot but when they do something like this (or hijack what a third party developer does and integrates it into the OS) it really bugs me. I know that these developers can add value to their apps but this developer has no other recourse. I’m glad that the developer of Fire made the app open source before he started working for Apple.
Almost everything you do is owned by your employer these days. It’s part of the contract that everyone signs when they get a job. If you’re a software developer then any company can claim ownership over code you write if they can prove that you were working on it during company time at all. It’s very hard to prove that you’re not, and if you don’t keep records of time spent then you are probably screwed.
Sucks, but the law is the law, if you don’t like it then change it.
This is a common practice. I work for a large software development company. We all have signed a contract that says that we are not allowed to develop an sell private software that works in the same business like the applications of the company I work for.
I bet Apple has a similar clause in their contracts. And because Apple is active in many software markets (OS, Audio, Video, Development, etc…) it should be easy for them to declare a software build by an employee as their own property.
…Thats life…. 🙁
I wouldn’t jump so fast on the bashing train. The article is full of “if” and “it seems” and in fact nobody knows what is going on. The guy works for Apple and it seems he didn’t develop his app on his working time, and it seems he didn’t use Apple’s resources to develop it, and if… then….I need more information.
apple-“fans” should realize that apple is as “big” and bad as ms, the only difference is their small marketshare and their monopol on hard AND software.
remember the story about how when apple was first starting out how steve wozniak had to go to his boss at hp and disclose his idea for the apple i? under his contract, hp had first crack at any ip developed by its employees. fortunately for wozniak, apple and the rest of the world, hp took a pass at the idea of a “personal computer”.
apple probably doesn’t want to find itself “pulling an hp”.
Wozniak gave HP a first-buyer option because he is nice guy. He did not have to do so. This is well known and Wozniak himself has said so in a series of interviews.
The appropriation of employee’s own intellectual property is a growing trend in most industries. The music industry has worked very hard to turn musician’s creations into work-for-hire arrangements that deprive musicians of the copyright of their creations.
We need more and better dialogue. Most decent people are outraged at the predatory and overbearing practices of most large corporations, once they learn about them.
“apple-“fans” should realize that apple is as “big” and bad as ms, the only difference is their small marketshare and their monopol on hard AND software.”
I wouldn’t say Apple is as big as Microsoft, as for as bad as MS, I highly doubt it, Apple has done it’s fair share of sketchy things but it is no where near the level of crap that MS has already been found guilty of numerous times.
This is a huge reason I will never buy anthing Microsoft makes, they don’t deserve my money.
Thank you! Fincally one person talking sense.
If you really think that apple is a ‘good’ company, you must be nuts. Its just as bad as MS. The only reason they use Opensource is out of desperation. (A browser that is based on OSS is better then none right? Also an OS based on BSD is better then the crap they had before, right?)
I mean, we saw what they did with the ipod for windows.
Its just that Apple dosnt have a wide market share like MS since it knows it wont succed there. So instead they are going towards the more niche market and hoping to spread from there. And its working. Good for them! Good buisness strategies!
But dont think that Apple are some kind of saints. Both apple and MS are companies out there to make money (Staying a monopoly is harder then it seems) nothing more.
Yes, we developers signed something saying the company owns what we develop…on their dime…and with their resources…and for their business. If any of these things were met, it belongs to them (per the contract you probably signed).
If, however, you wrote the app on your time, with your machines and for your business (which has to be unrelated to your job function), then they have no right to that code.
For instance, if I am a software developer writing flight simulators for work and I go home and write an open source flight simulator, I am asking for trouble. However, if I go home and use my machine and my time and I write an elaborate ebook engine of some sort, that is MINE, not theirs.
How do you people think that all these open source projects get written? Do you really think that all these people don’t have jobs? If what you said was true, then there would be literally thousands of companies claiming ownership of different parts of Linux and other open source projects through this same “clause”. Quite simply, what apple is doing is reprehensible and pretty much illegal (as long as he developed all of the app at home and on his own dime).
i agree with you mostly andi, but in a general sense that’s just not true. apple’s gui toolkit api is based off of the openstep standard. their config files use xml. their os core is bsd. their display and screenshot format is pdf. their browser safari is based off khtml. they integrated the x11 window server with quartz. osx’s compiler is gcc. the list goes ON and ON. i want to see the “big bad microsoft” do just half of what apple’s done, and then i might begin to consider apple draconian.
So because Apple is making money from other people’s free work and being nasty to their coders, that’s better than MS making money off only what their coders produce and being nasty to them?
I wish people would stop speculating and making assumptions about who is entitled to what. Your employer’s contract with you as an employee determines what you can and cannot do. It may allow for you to go off and write your own software products, or it may not. You may also have been working on a project before joining the company and have it grandfathered in as part of your employment agreement. If you don’t and your employer claims it you have only yourself to blame.
Once again, everyone needs to calm down and wait utnil such time (if any) we KNOW ALL the FACTS. From this brief article we know only ONE slice of the story. We DO NOT know APPLE’s side of the story. We may never.
There are conditions under which Apple (or any other company) would (likely) have a legitimate, legal and ethical reason to do this.
Was the work done with Apple resources (time or equipment)?
Was the work related to current Apple R&D efforts?
We don’t know.
That said, I hope Apple is conducting itself legally and ethically. Furthermore, they could conduct themselves above this by perhaps paying this fellow some kind of bonus, if they choose to use the product themselves.
P.S. This reminds me of the backlash against Apple for (allegedly) not fixing a security issue with 10.2.8. Everyone went of half-cocked with half (or less) the facts. And turned out to be wrong.
I would really like to hear some comments from CEO’s and executives on this issue. They are the ones who establish corporate policy about ownership of employee code while employed at their companies. So how about it guys? Any lurking V.P.s wanna chime into a public forum and expound your philosophy?
P.S. This reminds me of the backlash against Apple for (allegedly) not fixing a security issue with 10.2.8. Everyone went of half-cocked with half (or less) the facts. And turned out to be wrong.
Or it was because of the backlash and the potential loss of loyal customers did Apple decide to release a security patch for 10.2.8
There is some truth in this, but the difference is Apple does know their custumors would never accepts an OS that controls them instead of the other way round. In this sense Apple respects their custumors very much and the custumors respect Apple very much. This little secret keeps the momentum of the Apple community going.
Or it was because of the backlash and the potential loss of loyal customers did Apple decide to release a security patch for 10.2.8
Perhaps. We’ll probably never know for sure. But in APple’s defense, the backlash began almost immediately, base on incomplete and unsubstantiated facts. Apple was given little benefit-of-the-doubt despite a pretty decent track record.
As someone that develops (and maintains) software, I can say that it often takes time to verify and troubleshoot such problems. Sometimes it can take days. And there is really no need for them to comment until THEY know all of the facts.
This sort of half-assed, immature, knee-jerk reaction is luxury for the Internet Anonymous.
“employees must assign the rights of their inventions to their employer, those sections do not apply if the employee developed it on his or her own time, without using the employer’s equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information. ”
and here I was thinking the law was to protect the people not to stifle innovation and make more money for the corporate bigwigs …
and here I was thinking the law was to protect the people not to stifle innovation and make more money for the corporate bigwigs
The law, theoretically, is about JUSTICE and fairness. To this end, the question is whether or not it would be just and fair for a person to use someone else’s resources (without permission) to produce something for their own personal profit.
Think of it like this. What if someone came to work in your home…perhaps doing some re-modeling. While they were at your home, they setup some other business and ran that business from your property, using your electricity, phone, plumbing, space, etc.
Something else that is important to balance with the “corporate bigwigs” is the fact that there are investors in these corporations, and in many cases, ultimately, the investor is YOU and ME (either directly, or indirectly), typically through our retirement portfolios.
For instance, if I am a software developer writing flight simulators for work and I go home and write an open source flight simulator, I am asking for trouble. However, if I go home and use my machine and my time and I write an elaborate ebook engine of some sort, that is MINE, not theirs.
Well in this case he was developing an app that did something very similar to what Sherlock does, except Sherlock doesn’t support this web site (yet). Also, I don’t think any of you know what this programmer’s contract with Apple says. Or if he was developing this app on company time. Or using company resources. Having said that, it still sucks. Unless much of this app was developed on company time, they should have offered to just buy the code from him — they can afford it. They may not be MS, but they’ve got a solid $4 billion in the bank.
“Well in this case he was developing an app that did something very similar to what Sherlock does, except Sherlock doesn’t support this web site (yet). Also, I don’t think any of you know what this programmer’s contract with Apple says. Or if he was developing this app on company time. Or using company resources. Having said that, it still sucks. Unless much of this app was developed on company time, they should have offered to just buy the code from him — they can afford it. They may not be MS, but they’ve got a solid $4 billion in the bank.”
The point I was making was that if he isn’t using company resources, isn’t using company time and isn’t doing something that is the same as his function at work (same type of project), the law allows him to develop software in his free time.
If, however, he is using his work computer, work time or doing the same thing HE is doing at work, then he doen’t have much of a choice. Though, I made this point earlier.
It doesn’t matter if Apple is doing the same thing as long as HE isn’t (for work). Apple could be developing the Sherlock program, but if he isn’t on that project (at work), he could develop it at home on his own time.
Now, if Apple asked him to sign an agreement that says they own ALL HIS IP that he does in his free time and with his money/equipment…I think that is against the law and they would not have grounds for such an agreement, whether or not he did sign it.
even what you code outside the of work belongs to them. Been like that in the industry for a while. Sad…
Unless things have changed in the three years I have been away from IBM, they DO NOT own your code as long as you are not using their machine, their time or working on something that is the same as the project you are working on at work.
When I started at IBM I asked this and I made them clarify to the highest level I could (RE: I got a VP to tell me in writing).
If anyone is concerned about the issue, I suggest you approach the HR department and have them explain it to you. I think you will find that it is rather hard for a business to own your personal ideas and work that you do outside of work.
The point I was making was that if he isn’t using company resources, isn’t using company time and isn’t doing something that is the same as his function at work (same type of project), the law allows him to develop software in his free time.
We’re clearly talking provisions of a contract here, not your misguided interpretation of what “the law allows”.
Now, if Apple asked him to sign an agreement that says they own ALL HIS IP that he does in his free time and with his money/equipment…I think that is against the law and they would not have grounds for such an agreement, whether or not he did sign it.
And you base this on… your years of courtroom experience, or your layman’s interpretation of the law?
Would you care to provide some evidence as to how such a contract would be “illegal”?
What’s really scary is when sh*t job companies (McDonalds, Best Buy, etc) start making you sign contracts regarding your software.
One year I worked at Radio Shack as a sales clerk (selling connectors, cell phones, radios, etc). This was a crap sales job selling extremely lo-tech stuff. Yet they made me sign a contract stating that I was forbidden to write software, not only during work (understandable) but in my own free time with my own computer. If it was found out that I had indeed written software on my free time, I could be fired and any code I would have written would become the property of Tandy Inc.
It’s really awful to think that someone who’s working as a fry cook at Mickey D’s to supplement their income while they’re working on The Next Killer App to bring them out of a poverty-level income bracket would have to cede all their work to McDonald’s inc.
“Unless things have changed in the three years I have been away from IBM, they DO NOT own your code as long as you are not using their machine, their time or working on something that is the same as the project you are working on at work.”
Jason, in the hi-tech industy all of your IP belongs to the company you work for. Read you contracts. They are worst than an appartement rental agreement. This means even your ideas belong to them. If you have an idea you must fill out the appropriate form with the details and signed by witnesses.
Don’t get me wrong though, I am still not a big fan of Apple and how they abuse their loyal customers.
Cooperations are known to push contracts at you even if they know they are illegal. They just rely on the fact that you don’t know. How can any company tell me what I can and or can not do while not at work (or using their resources)? Hello, this ain’t Vietnam. Workers are free people here.
If such a contract like “don’t develop a competitive product ’cause it’s against our commercial interest” would be legal they could also give you a contract that says something like “you may not vote for the democrats while working for us because certain tax cuts the republicans promised are in our commercial interest”. See?
This is a good example of the “free market” gone nuts. Cooperations have no right to take your rights away. It’s time that an angry mob lynches the Apple CEO in the name of freedom and democracy it seems.
This is typical Apple BS. You sign your life away when you become an employee (or even a contractor sometimes). Has nothing to do with any particular laws, but rather the legally-binding agreement you sign when you work for them.
This is too bad, because Apple’s saying “You will only make $XK/year,” and they are also stifling innovation. Oh well. Go Steve.
@Jason
I was told by several persons that works there that your code does belong to IBM. But then it was Canadian IBMers. So maybe it’s different down in the States.
I think right to ownership is a fundamental right. If a company can claim ownership of something that u did in u free time and your own resources then don’t you think that OSS would be owned by some company or another?
And I doubt any contract can violate this. It’s like saying a contract can say “you and your kin are henceworth bonded labourers for <company> till eternity” A contract is valid as long as it’s provisions are within the law. If it violates the law it is nullified. For eg. any contract with a minor is illegal and therefore nullified.
Of course I am talking about Indian law
. But I think the principle is similar in a democracy.
Any code written for IBM, with IBM machines or on IBM time belongs to IBM. If I write code for an IBM project on my own time, they own that.
If, however, I write OSS on my own time and with my own resources, the do not own that.
1. The contract does not state this. Yes, it is ambiguous, but if you have it clarified (as I did when I was employed), you would find that they don’t own it.
2. An employer cannot claim ownership over ideas that do not pertain to your work (as long as you didn’t use their recources for it). IBM can claim ownership of a book I wrote if I wrote it on their machine during work. However, they cannot claim ownership over that book if I wrote it at night and on weekends using my own machine. Same thing for software unrelated to my work.
Essentially what people are arguining for is indentured servitude to a corporation.
3. “Would you care to provide some evidence as to how such a contract would be “illegal”?”
Sure:
It could be argued that the contract would:
1. Be anti-competative
2. stifel the 1st amendment
3. restrict my ability to earn a fair wage
Listen, a company cannot fire me for going to church, cannot restrict what I say/do on my own time (as long as I don’t affiliate myself with that group) and they cannot impose restrictions on my life other than those 8 hours I work for them.
What makes you think they can claim ownership over your mind and thoughts outside of work? They cannot.
How about this twist: If what you say is true, SCO indeed does own Linux. Why? Because an employe of SCO, at one time or another, gave back to the OS community in the form of GPL’ed software. Well, since they were a SCO employee, that software is SCO’s…so….
Actually, SCO, IBM, HP, Morotola, SUN and a bunch of other huge companies would be fighting over bits and pieces of Linux to turn a huge profit. Quite simply, they cannot claim this so they don’t even bother trying.
It really says something when even SCO won’t try a tatic….
If I only had the time…
This looks like fairly moderate job for a Java Port.
Then it could also run for the Windows crowd.
Steve Jobs is such the Mini-Me version of Dr. Microsoft. Steve runs around stealing ideas and code from other companies and then cracks down on an employee… for SHAREWARE….
Damn, Steve… give the guy a damn break. You fly around in your richer-than-sin $90 million Gulfstream and you are busting a guy for writing some shareware…. that helps your own platform…
Better ease off that crystal meth habit, Mini-Me Steve. It will be the end of you and your shiny white machines.
Ok, folks. Have you ever seen the movie Pirates of Silicon Valley. Does anyone remember the part where Wozniak has to show HP the Apple I even thought it was his invention out of his garage?
…..its called EWS….Employee Written Software…and its hosted on IBM servers and its free. It was really popular during OS/2’s heyday and can still be found on Boulder’s and Hursley’s servers
http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/pmglobe/license.txt
Yes I know its the usage license, but I cannot be bothered going to find the actual contract for producing this type of software, but it is still done to this day.
Again, Apple continues to find new ways of shooting itself in the foot, and I wonder when an update to Apple’s OS will have a “feature” in it that disables “Non-Approved” software.
[Max wrote:]
“Cooperations are known to push contracts at you even if they know they are illegal. They just rely on the fact that you don’t know. How can any company tell me what I can and or can not do while not at work (or using their resources)? Hello, this ain’t Vietnam. Workers are free people here.”
Ha ha, funny.
No, they are not free.
The land belongs to corporations. People have to eat.
are you insane? you’d truely rather have a proprietary system like os 9 over os x? hell yes i’d rather have apple make money off of people’s free work. it establishes a standard OS core and allows for the OSS community to improve a commerical based OS. say what you will, but no open source desktop environment matches mac os x. kde and gnome have years before they are that mature.
for once i finally can use an OS and run my games, photoshop, etc, side by side with a terminal. if i want i can view the source code of the OS’s kernel. there’s a fine line between “taking” someone’s free work, and “using it to its fullest potential” and i think apple’s done the latter, not the former.