EA (And Other Studios) Apparently Have Policies That Require Developers To Gather Permission Before Producing Any Creative Works Outside Of Work

[Deleted member 11976]

it's not a corporate defence, it's just a basic understanding of how contracts and laws work

no one is arguing that companies should own the entirety of your creative output, just an understanding why these clauses (which DO NOT mean that a company owns all of your creative output) exists

Click to shrink...

It's easier for some posters to completely disregard things like asking for a carve out and, instead, call those of us who have calmly shared our (varied) experiences with contracts like this corporate defenders, bootlickers, and sufferers of stockholm syndrome. It's embarrassing reading some of this stuff.

 

[superNESjoe]

I work in the industry and I'm not gonna drink the kool-aid on this nonsense.

I work for a company that allows me to continue my own creative work, including game development, on my own free time. It's absolutely pathetic that I have to list that as a "perk" of my job, that I'm allowed to pursue my own creative endeavors in my free time.

 

[Crossing Eden]

The game industry is so fucked, every new horror story is validation for not working in this terrible industry.

And people actually defending this garbage is some sunken place shit.

Click to shrink...

If a misconception about how the industry works is enough motivation for you to not work in the gaming industry, (or most industries...) then you probably weren't very interested in doing so in the first place. 🤷‍♂️

 

[The Albatross]

This is common in software development particularly with legacy companies. My employer doesn't do it but I know a lot that do. I guy I worked with used to do freelance with me but then he left to work at EMC (now owned by Dell policy may be different) and he had to stop doing freelance.

I think it's stupid but to be honest the rationale that a lot of companies have is a true one. I've used a ton of software I've written in one role for freelance, or the same methodologies, or vice versa. Im probably the reason companies have dumb policies like this, but they're still dumb. Companies lose more productivity for policies like this than they gain. But the rationale is likely a true one.

 

[Raonak]

Protip: This is mostly standard in big companies that like encroaching on as many worker rights as possible.

less time spent on hobby side projects = more time available for crunch

 

[Deleted member 43084]

less time on hobby side projects = more time for cunch

Click to shrink...

what.

 

[XSystem]

This entire thread is disgusting

No fucking corporation should ever have any legal authority on ANYTHING its employees do outside of their work. Holy shit the corporate defense even by verified members is horrific.

Click to shrink...

Full agree. I've read a number of replies so far and am shocked at the level of indifference or support expressed for this. The prospect alone that some music piece I create in my free time automagically becomes my employer's is ridicolous, and something I have never encountered in Germany thus far.

I'd also like to point out that a lot of people in this thread act as if this is a standard non-compete. There is, however, a stark difference between "If you get a 2nd work contract, you have to talk to us first." vs. "Literally any piece of IP you create is ours."

 

[Kurdel]

If a misconception about how the industry works is enough motivation for you to not work in the gaming industry, (or most industries...) then you probably weren't very interested in doing so in the first place. 🤷‍♂️

Click to shrink...

People trying to gaslight us that the industry is healthy and fine for decades now but I still don't buy it.

Nice try though!

 

[Jakisthe]

Full agree. I've read a number of replies so far and am shocked at the level of indifference or support expressed for this. The prospect alone that some music piece I create in my free time automagically becomes my employer's is ridicolous, and something I have never encountered in Germany thus far.

I'd also like to point out that a lot of people in this thread act as if this is a standard non-compete. There is, however, a stark difference between "If you get a 2nd work contract, you have to talk to us first." vs. "Literally any piece of IP you create is ours."

Click to shrink...

No matter how many times someone tries to spin this as "the company owns everything you make while under contract", that doesn't make it true.

 

[newmoneytrash]

The prospect alone that some music piece I create in my free time automagically becomes my employer's is ridicolous

Click to shrink...

that is ridiculous and also not what is happening

 

[Penny Royal]

Quite late to the thread, but I work in insurance and if I come up with an insurance product idea and commit it to paper while I'm still employed with it can be kept by my employer.

 

[Crossing Eden]

People trying to gaslight us that the industry is healthy and fine for decades now but I still don't buy it.

Nice try though!

Click to shrink...

"This is a standard practice in not just the gaming industry but multiple industries in general for a variety of valid reasons that benefit both the employer and employee."
=/=
"The industry is healthy and fine."

 

[Crimsonskies]

It's easier for some posters to completely disregard things like asking for a carve out and, instead, call those of us who have calmly shared our (varied) experiences with contracts like this corporate defenders, bootlickers, and sufferers of stockholm syndrome. It's embarrassing reading some of this stuff.

Click to shrink...

I think peoples sympathies with the big corporate gaming studios are a little lacking given the revelations on what is going on inside of different game studios these last couple of years especially the big ones such as EA, Activision and Ubisoft, I would be embarrassed walking around saying I worked for either companies honestly.

Activision Blizzard (China controversy and horrible business practices,), EA (half-finished games with terrible business practices and biowares employees being driven to nervous breakdowns), Ubisoft horrible business practices and half finished games that flop (Ghost Recon breakpoint).

Not to mention the countless stories from developers themselves regarding crunchtime and how they are treated as disposable and are afraid to ask for some time off.

Something clearly is horribly wrong and the video game industry seems to be a terrible industry to work in.

 

[XSystem]

No matter how many times someone tries to spin this as "the company owns everything you make while under contract", that doesn't make it true.

Click to shrink...

that is ridiculous and also not what is happening

Click to shrink...

It is literally what is posited by the tweet of the OP:

Working full-time for a major studio in games usually means signing away your rights to any creative output you might produce outside of work hours.

Click to shrink...

 

[Kurdel]

"This is a standard practice in not just the gaming industry but multiple industries in general for a variety of valid reasons that benefit both the employer and employee."
=/=
"The industry is healthy and fine."

Click to shrink...

I mean, my original posts stands regardless of the way you chose to read it.

Despite being a lifelong fan, all the negative shit I hear out of this industry vastly outweighs any positive stuff I have heard, no forum poster sniping me on my personal motivation will change that lol

 

[Jakisthe]

It is literally what is posited by the tweet of the OP:

Click to shrink...

And is not what is actually happening, tweet or no.

 

[Crimsonskies]

"This is a standard practice in not just the gaming industry but multiple industries in general for a variety of valid reasons that benefit both the employer and employee."
=/=
"The industry is healthy and fine."

Click to shrink...

Economically sure the billions are rolling in but at what costs ?

These last couple of years good games have been far and few between and indie developers have actually been making some of my must play games instead of the tripple A scene.

 

[Stixitnu]

There's something wrong with the world when corporations own whatever you create, even if you do it off of company hours and it's unrelated to your job.

These kinds of parasitic clauses need to die.

Click to shrink...

Utopia doesn't exist. Like many people in here have mentioned the companies they work for are very lax and offer support with this.

 

[Kurdel]

Utopia doesn't exist. Like many people in here have mentioned the companies they work for are very lax and offer support with this.

Click to shrink...

Like Google firing employees looking to organize workers last week, sometimes corporate policies are purposely lax in practice so they can descend the full force of the legal team if they catch you slipping or just want to fire your ass.

 

[newmoneytrash]

It is literally what is posited by the tweet of the OP:

Click to shrink...

the tweet in the OP sensationalises a fairly standard clause that does not mean a company gets to keep everything you make

in fact *without* this clause companies would more freely be able to attempt to own your creative work if they could prove any of it was made on company time or with company equipment. while almost definitely not it's intent this clause *helps prevent* companies from doing the thing that people are claiming that it does

 

[Stixitnu]

It's almost like capitalism is a broken system that disproportionately benefits the employer at the expense of the employee.

Click to shrink...

I go to work and they pay me money. That's kinda the deal when I signed on and I don't feel taken advantage of.

 

[Deleted member 43084]

Something clearly is horribly wrong and the video game industry seems to be a terrible industry to work in.

Click to shrink...

Despite being a lifelong fan, all the negative shit I hear out of this industry vastly outweighs any positive stuff I have heard, no forum poster sniping me on my personal motivation will change that lol

Click to shrink...

There are indeed issues with the video game industry. Those issues are 100% unrelated to this topic (which is not confined to the video game industry), and confounding them is doing a disservice.

 

[Kurdel]

I go to work and they pay me money. That's kinda the deal when I signed on and I don't feel taken advantage of.

Click to shrink...

Aren't we lucky that we are the only civilisation in history to be immune to propaganda and being brainwashed against our own interests?

There are indeed issues with the video game industry. Those issues are 100% unrelated to this topic, and confounding them is doing a disservice.

Click to shrink...

My personal take, not speaking for anyone else, of course.

 

[Lothars]

I think peoples sympathies with the big corporate gaming studios are a little lacking given the revelations on what is going on inside of different game studios these last couple of years especially the big ones such as EA, Activision and Ubisoft, I would be embarrassed walking around saying I worked for either companies honestly.

Click to shrink...

That's on you more than anyone else, There are tons of employees that enjoy working at those companies and are happy with how they are treated. It's never going to be everyone but that doesn't mean they are bad companies. This OP is pretty bad and it actively hinders the topic.

 

[Striferser]

There are lot of problem in the video game industry, but i don't think this is one of them. Yeah, like other said, this is pretty standard, but most of the time, unless you make it real big, company won't give a shit if you ask for a permission or not. Me and my friend did publish a book when we're still working with Gameloft. Then again, i think for gameloft the clausul is related to the field we work with...

 

[newmoneytrash]

Aren't we lucky that we are the only civilisation in history to be immune to propaganda and being brainwashed against our own interests?

Click to shrink...

people in this thread accusing other people of having stockholm syndrome and having been influenced by propaganda instead of just admitting they misinterpreted the clause sure is something

 

[Deleted member 29195]

It's really wild getting called brainwashed for sharing your experience.

I'm not saying it's good. I'm not saying I like it.

I'm saying it's standard. In this industry and many, many others. I'm also saying that most folks are naive and don't understand that the contract isn't enforceable as written.

This is also shitty. This is also bad. I don't like this.

However, this is standard in the industry. And it doesn't mean they own all their creative work. Period. Local laws and regulations in California, and many other US states and EU countries prevent non competes from having the power you're claiming.

Like I don't like that I have to sign this. But I do. And I actually have so I know the extent to which it's actually enforceable.

Calling people corporate apologists, when we are all on the same side fucking sucks yo.

 

[Ra]

My father worked in the technology development center for a tire giant, and he had to sign something very similar to this.

A few people refused and walked away, because it was like owning your brain, but he didn't care because he had no other aspirations at the time.

A decade or so later they changed the NDA to only more closely to only cover works related to the industry itself.

The policies aren't explicitly in place to steal your original works, they are there to make sure your work is not using the knowledge of intellectual property you have gained while working at the job. It's also to protect the company from you creating a competitive product because you have intimate understanding of the weaknesses of their business.

There's also the matter of making sure an employee is not using company resources to create a product or work. Hello John Carmack.

There are many solid reasons that these agreements are standard.

 

[Amauri14]

Well, that's pretty much the standard practice with a lot of companies in plenty of industries, so I'm not surprised.

 

[Kieli]

A lot of the discourse on this thread errs way too far towards the emotional. It betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of what these contracts actually entail. No, you are not signing your soul off to Mephistopheles wherein he has eternal rights to any and every piece of thought, breath, and organic matter you produce. That's not even legally enforceable.

What it is is an instrument to protect both sides. Corporate espionage and tool/technique/concept stealing does occur. You'd have to be naive to think otherwise.

What happens is when you work on a personal project that could potentially generate revenue, you should probably talk to your manager and your legal team to get sign-off. Should they mind your personal business? Probably not. But when the domain overlaps (e.g. you both make games), then you want to save yourself the hassle of going to court because you've taken the initiative to let them know, "Hey, I'm working on a thing. We cool?"

Now, do some (or most) companies use the contract as a blunt tool to intimidate and silence its employees? Sure. But I think that's a different issue/assertion than what we're discussing in this thread, which is if the company even owns the rights to your off-hours work (the answer is, it depends on what you made and how related it is to the work you get paid to do).

tl;dr Ultimately, if you act in good faith, the legal system should in theory cut you some slack. I'm talking about the Canadian system, no idea how it works in the states.

 

[Ishmae1]

/not a lawyer, just someone that's worked for several big game companies

This is standard in large development companies I've been at, easily excepted / nulled, and as someone that's worked at both EA and Microsoft, is not nearly as draconian as it can imply. I remember when we (Westwood) were purchased by EA and a lot of us were incensed at the very idea of this as well, because we all read the contracts put in front of us. Many of us simply listed the stuff we do in our spare time and it was all excepted from our employment contracts with EA.

As to MS, they have a very open "moonlighting" policy, actually. I can develop games / software on my own that isn't in competition with my work titles, write whatever novel / fiction / book, or make a TV series and it wouldn't be considered MS property. If I used or wanted to use a Microsoft owned IP for something, then it's owned by MS and I'd need to get specific permission or negotiate license the rights to it for an independent work regardless. If I'm developing on MS owned equipment (i.e. using my work PC or laptop or whatever) or with MS-owned software, then there could be issues, I suppose? I've never seen that come up nor really thought about using work resources for personal projects.

If I'm directly competing with my job in terms of what I'm making, then yes, that's an issue. But that's an obvious one.

Generally anyone I know that does side / other work simply says to the company "hey, I do <this> other thing" and the company has said "OK, no problem." It simply needs to be disclosed / documented.

This is just my experience, obviously. If you want to debate the morality of including or asking for things like this in a contract in the first place, that's fine. I think a lot of people don't realize that you can negotiate these things. Many just accept what's put in front of them for work contracts (or don't read them), which isn't the point of a contract - both parties should go forwards happy.

 

[Deleted member 29195]

A lot of the discourse on this thread errs way too far towards the emotional. It betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of what these contracts actually entail. No, you are not signing your soul off to Mephistopheles wherein he has eternal rights to any and every piece of thought, breath, and organic matter you produce. That's not even legally enforceable.

What it is is an instrument to protect both sides. Corporate espionage and tool/technique/concept stealing does occur. You'd have to be naive to think otherwise.

What happens is when you work on a personal project that could potentially generate revenue, you should probably talk to your manager and your legal team to get sign-off. Should they mind your personal business? Probably not. But when the domain overlaps (e.g. you both make games), then you want to save yourself the hassle of going to court because you've taken the initiative to let them know, "Hey, I'm working on a thing. We cool?"

Now, do some (or most) companies use the contract as a blunt tool to intimidate and silence its employees? Sure. But I think that's a different issue/assertion than what we're discussing in this thread, which is if the company even owns the rights to your off-hours work (the answer is, it depends on what you made and how related it is to the work you get paid to do).

tl;dr Ultimately, if you act in good faith, the legal system should in theory cut you some slack. I'm talking about the Canadian system, no idea how it works in the states.

Click to shrink...

I can confirm that California law as written would work similarly. I've heard of min wage workers for Amazon being taken advantage of by non competes, preventing you from finding a new job nearby if you quit too soon. But I think that was in states with poor labor assistance like Southern states.

 

[SeanBoocock]

There are indeed issues with the video game industry. Those issues are 100% unrelated to this topic (which is not confined to the video game industry), and confounding them is doing a disservice.

Click to shrink...

Yes. This thread should be moved to Etc or locked because this is a modern labor issue, not something specific to the video games industry.

Every contract I've signed or been presented for games (and games adjacent) positions has had a version of this clause. Still, I have been able to claim prior inventions and get clearance for personal projects that otherwise fall within the provisions. It has also been a frequent topic of discussion about how to do better with regards to employees wanting to work on projects, even games.

I would happily welcome regulation, like which already exists in California, that would prevent companies from claiming rights to employee's work save in narrowly defined ways. At the same time I understand why these clauses exist and the reticence of any large company from exposing themselves to greater risk by forgoing it.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Economically sure the billions are rolling in but at what costs ?

These last couple of years good games have been far and few between and indie developers have actually been making some of my must play games instead of the tripple A scene.

Click to shrink...

Well that's incredibly subjective.

 

[Jakisthe]

A lot of the discourse on this thread errs way too far towards the emotional. It betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of what these contracts actually entail. No, you are not signing your soul off to Mephistopheles wherein he has eternal rights to any and every piece of thought, breath, and organic matter you produce. That's not even legally enforceable.

What it is is an instrument to protect both sides. Corporate espionage and tool/technique/concept stealing does occur. You'd have to be naive to think otherwise.

What happens is when you work on a personal project that could potentially generate revenue, you should probably talk to your manager and your legal team to get sign-off. Should they mind your personal business? Probably not. But when the domain overlaps (e.g. you both make games), then you want to save yourself the hassle of going to court because you've taken the initiative to let them know, "Hey, I'm working on a thing. We cool?"

Now, do some (or most) companies use the contract as a blunt tool to intimidate and silence its employees? Sure. But I think that's a different issue/assertion than what we're discussing in this thread, which is if the company even owns the rights to your off-hours work (the answer is, it depends on what you made and how related it is to the work you get paid to do).

tl;dr Ultimately, if you act in good faith, the legal system should in theory cut you some slack. I'm talking about the Canadian system, no idea how it works in the states.

Click to shrink...

Knee jerk reactions to standard, mutually beneficial legal aspects of working in large companies is something of a hallmark around here though.

 

[Kieli]

Knee jerk reactions to standard, mutually beneficial legal aspects of working in large companies is something of a hallmark around here though.

Click to shrink...

I'm inclined to think that some folks either (1) don't work in the tech industry or (2) have never worked a full-time job. Otherwise, they'd have encountered the sort of contracts that some of us are talking about, which doesn't reflect the type of contracts mentioned in the OP (I mean, these can definitely exist, but won't be legally enforceable).

You can't just write a contract to make legal something that's illegal, that's not how it works.

 

[PaulloDEC]

These kinds of policy are all new to me. It sounds absolutely horrendous.

I can understand that employees shouldn't be able to directly exploit their employer, i.e. release a knock-off product based on privileged information, but beyond that people should be free to make and sell whatever they want on their own time.

 

[oneils]

Happens in government too. Id have some sort of cooling off period even after i leave government. Its rarely enforced, but ive seen it happen.

 

[Deleted member 1003]

This entire thread is disgusting

No fucking corporation should ever have any legal authority on ANYTHING its employees do outside of their work. Holy shit the corporate defense even by verified members is horrific.

Click to shrink...

Should they quit their jobs instead? Unions wouldn't necessarily remove this clause.

 

[Penny Royal]

have never worked a full-time job

Click to shrink...

That's something that's readily apparent across a whole swathe of threads & comment here.

 

[Doctre81]

That's completely normal. You are using THEIR resources so of course

 

[ItIsOkBro]

What I'm surprised about is all the comments about people turning down jobs when the contract says 'we own anything you create', instead of saying uuuh that's not legal.

 

[ZeroDotFlow]

I'm inclined to think that some folks either (1) don't work in the tech industry or (2) have never worked a full-time job. Otherwise, they'd have encountered the sort of contracts that some of us are talking about, which doesn't reflect the type of contracts mentioned in the OP (I mean, these can definitely exist, but won't be legally enforceable).

You can't just write a contract to make legal something that's illegal, that's not how it works.

Click to shrink...

I've worked in the tech industry. The way people are downplaying these contracts as 'well it's not THAT BAD' is horseshit because I've encountered plenty of bad contracts and corporate bullshit.

It doesn't matter if it's legally enforceable or not. What matters is the threat and the fact that employers could easily force someone into a settlement or else face incredibly expensive litigation. We've seen this happen multiple times already in different scenarios (for things such as sexual harassment and silencing victims). It's the reason why California banned non-competes entirely.

 

[xch1n]

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

Click to shrink...

It has a chilling effect on people doing work on their own time with their own resources. When it comes down to it, whoever is hiring has far more money to spend lawyering up than the individual employee doing something at home on nights and weekends.

Source: I didn't work on a personal project until leaving a job because my contract had the same language in it.

 

[LordDraven]

This just came across my feed, found it odd and interesting. The policy (most likely written in the employment contract) says you have to ask for permission before producing any creative works outside of the studio because, if I'm reading this right, they might OWN those works created outside of your 8 hours. That's fucking nuts.

Click to shrink...

Standard bro

 

[Kiro]

Canada here. This is standard in many industries. Heck even education, I don't own my own lesson plans. In my free time I can't create learning resources and selling them without approval from my board.

 

[Captain of Outer Space]

This was basically the issue with John Carmack's VR work as he went to Oculus, right?

 

[stryke]

This was basically the issue with John Carmack's VR work as he went to Oculus, right?

Click to shrink...

Carmack's work eventually became part of a competing company. I feel that's different compared to an artist doing a drawing or a writer doing a book in their own time that only benefits themselves.

That said, you could also argue Zenimax has no business of trying to claim Carmack's work when they're not even that much in the VR tech space apart from a couple of games.

 

[take_marsh]

Non-competes sound pretty norm.

Owning all creative work made outside sounds incredibly American. I'd love some legal reciepts for this being enforced and the creation is completely different from what the employer makes.

 

[Decarb]

This is standard in almost any industry.

Is this going to reveal who has actually worked for companies in their life?

Click to shrink...

I work for a shipping company and they don't give a shit about what I do in my free time. I've had my photography stuff running in parallel and the company actually asked me to take some product shots for them instead of hiring outside photographer (for less money of course).

Is this an American thing?