Jonathan Cooper, an Animator, previously at Naughty Dog and a Artistic director of animation on Assassin's creed 3 chimed in.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
EA (And Other Studios) Apparently Have Policies That Require Developers To Gather Permission Before Producing Any Creative Works Outside Of Work
- Thread starter Deleted member 18944
- Start date
I've updated my post with a bit of clarification. But basically the company can't and doesn't own you completely outside a basic second job clause. I don't think that's even possible under the laws around here - they favor employees over corporations to a degree unthinkable in the US where slave like conditions flourish - in some states at least.
It's not always about owning the employee. In my old job, I know at least two people that took ideas for their own side projects from games they were QA testing at the time. That's generally frowned upon, especially when their side project would be out before the NDA'd game was.
Sometimes it's just done subconsciously too.
This sucks, and has always sucked, but it is not altogether unheard of in many creative or creative-adjacent industries.
Yes, your time is yours, but what you do on your own time also has some potential impact on the company so they often put language to protect themselves.
Same reason that you may be required to comport yourself in a specified fashion or not allowed to work for a competitor after leaving.
While it is not the intention of these to protect you, they CAN do so.
Yes, your time is yours, but what you do on your own time also has some potential impact on the company so they often put language to protect themselves.
Same reason that you may be required to comport yourself in a specified fashion or not allowed to work for a competitor after leaving.
While it is not the intention of these to protect you, they CAN do so.
Let's take this a little further.
Not only is this a standard in many tech industries, you usually have to list anything that you were working on previous to being hired so it doesn't fall under company work. You also might get into a grey area contract that won't let you work for a competitor up to a year after leaving the company.
Not only is this a standard in many tech industries, you usually have to list anything that you were working on previous to being hired so it doesn't fall under company work. You also might get into a grey area contract that won't let you work for a competitor up to a year after leaving the company.
It's almost as though the people writing about about or commenting on this practice have never worked in any corporate capacity.
.
.
Yeah I had to do this at a media company. I wasn't even an engineer lol
That's how 99% of tech companies are run.
Asking for permission is probably pretty easy tho. The company basically protects itself against employees with bad intents.
Edit: it is also protecting employees. Can't see much negativity with that clause as long as the granting of the permission is a fair process.
Asking for permission is probably pretty easy tho. The company basically protects itself against employees with bad intents.
Edit: it is also protecting employees. Can't see much negativity with that clause as long as the granting of the permission is a fair process.
Last edited:
This is fairly standard in most tech jobs and I've never seen it enforced. This is more for the talent at the executive levels, as far as I understand it.
I agree it sounds bad but legalese tends to paint an inaccurate picture.
I agree it sounds bad but legalese tends to paint an inaccurate picture.
The intent of that clause is to stop the company from trying to sue you if there is overlap.
It should be reiterated that all of these ownership disputes are only active while employed at the company.
wait is this a normal thing? i can't tell from the prior 250 posts.
It is and will always be worth criticizing the biggest corporations for not setting a good example, and it's a topic worth talking about especially when not everyone is aware of it.
It is and will always be worth criticizing the biggest corporations for not setting a good example, and it's a topic worth talking about especially when not everyone is aware of it.
Never worked outside the EU, and I had such clauses in my contracts, yes. It is definitely not an US-only thing.
i am always baffled how Era on the one hand positions itself as this gathering place for gaming insiders, yet frequently half the posters are baffled when hearing about something that is absolute standard in the industry (whether the rule is bad or not doesn't change fact that a ton of people on this forum who love to tell devs what to do are rather clueless about the industry).
It is. People that think this is normal (which I guess you are one of) have no idea about how things actually work. This is not the standard.
It's just a legal clause so that you don't become competition. I doubt EA would have had a problem if that programmer decided to do music in his spare time.
As someone who has drafted or reviewed my fair share of contracts it is fairly standard practice across various industries. They are hardly, if ever, enforced.
Yeah exactly. The laws are written in most places to be considerate of the employee. Basically the non-compete is like a EULA- mostly unenforcable depending on your location.
It is, and I have had similar provisions in contracts I've had with companies. That doesn't make it any less vile, though.
To be very clear, I think this provision sucks. But often times local laws are written in a way that these are not enforable as written. So the situation on the ground for creators is a little better than you'd think.
It's still very much worth talking about
It's still very much worth talking about
Sure. The standard is in the EU that if you work for a company like in my case Disney, I'm not allowed to write a book about a girl that has a rare disease. That's what is in your made up contract? Sure, I believe you, I really do. Talk about posting in bad faith.
I have also never worked outside the EU and also always had that paragraph in all of my contracts. It's pretty common for many industries and / or positions.
I'm from Spain and I worked in Belgium for a few months at a video game localization company, as a Frontend Web Developer. In my contract it said I couldn't work for any competitors during that time, and during the next 12 months after ending that contract.
When you read what "competitor" means in the agreement, it basically says any company that does video game localizations or frontend development with the technologies I knew. Which of course is bullshit.
They never enforced that though. I think it's just something they put in contracts to sue you if you become a serious problem for them.
Sure, but I suppose I take more issue with the pointed example of SA and the games industry when this is a much wider issue than that.
Ireland here. Every single company I've seen, and most of my friends and acquaintances have these kinds of clauses.
It also does "protect" companies as well from the point of view that companies don't want an employees work outside of their contracted hours to impact the work they're paid for.
That said, yeah I've never seen or heard of anyone not get permission for whatever they want to do. Hell its in my contract and two of my ex colleagues were running their own start ups with permission.
It seems a bit weird when the random anonymous poster accuses the guy who had to prove to staff that he actually works in the industry about making jo his work contract.
but hey, whatever works for you, Walt :)
I don't think it's really a gathering point for gaming insiders just because it happens to have a lot of them. A lot of users here just play video games but have an interest in the industry.
I graduated computer science not to long ago. I started posting on forums like these around the same time I wanted to aim for a career, not to mention people who entered the industry as indies, which is possible without first-hand experience with corporations.
Careful, if you disagree with that poster he will accuse you of making up your contract ;)
This is standard at all big companies. When you sign your contract they have a section where you can attach whatever other projects you are working on currently or in the future. They are expecting small projects here not other huge games or businesses. Usually you can go to legal through HR after if you need stuff approved ive seen people actually get approval so I haven't seen it as an issue. I know several people who run patreons who are employed at these companies who are making decent money and haven't seen an issue with them. Usually this also only applies to employees and part time they are bringing in and not freelancers or outsource studios. I don't know how outsource studios function cause they could easily end up working on similar titles and producing similar art and assets for "competing" companies. If you really have an issue with it just make sure you read the contract fully if you are working some outside venture you are super passionate about for whatever reason and the employer doesn't like it then look somewhere else.
You're a very angry person. This is absolutely standard across many different industries all over the world.
One is usually allowed to write books and stuff. I have this clause in my current contract and I can assure you my employer couldn't care less if I wrote a book. These standard clauses are usually there in case of a potential dispute, they are rarely actually enforced.
sure, if it was enforced it wouldn't be okay, but it's just standard legalese used to cover extreme cases. even the example in the OP isn't of a company stopping them from doing anything, just that they saw the clause. there's no evidence they even engaged the company about it
you wanted to write this and disney told you that you couldn't?
This is a goofy ass response for something that multiple people from the EU in this thread have come out to say is standard
Well, I guess the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and France are unique then.
Funny, as European law is actually mostly decided by EU members within these countries.
The only bone I can give you is that your company is not acting within the law according to the EU agreements concerning things like this.
Funny, as European law is actually mostly decided by EU members within these countries.
The only bone I can give you is that your company is not acting within the law according to the EU agreements concerning things like this.
No worries, sorry I meant the twitter posts, not your thread title actually. You didn't know - and all of this certainly sounds wrong based on those tweets.
leaving it open as a possible venue for punishment at the employer's discretion is still vile
That's not what this is.
A hasty, misinformed OP is skewing the discussion here.
The technology company I work for (not games) has this. I've not seen a contract without this in. It's not that outrageous.
So if a programmer knew a company was going to release some art product X, and used that insider knowledge to create a competing art product Y before X even launches, that's fine because he's an engineer, right?
This clause is entirely about protecting trade secrets and IP. They won't have an issue if you try to sell something that's completely unrelated to what the business is doing.
Many also tend to bash those insiders or developers for having Stockholm Syndrome.
Oh no, the responses by people in the EU in the first 4 pages were that they never had a clause like that, it's only in the last few minutes people were claiming differently. :)
And the first 4 pages were right, and actually knew how the EU works.
This won't fly, it's not legal to demand this from employees, and that is an actual fact.
i don't understand what you're saying. are you arguing that someone doesn't have a clause in their contract that they're saying they have?
if this policy didn't exist there would be lawsuits by both employees and companies and we'd basically eventually end up with the same policy