目前，一些公司將競業(yè)禁止協(xié)議推向一個新的高度，要求員工簽署協(xié)議，放棄對自己創(chuàng)意的所有權(quán)利，不論是過去的、現(xiàn)在的還是未來的創(chuàng)意。如何保護(hù)自己在業(yè)余時間、利用個人資源創(chuàng)造的智慧結(jié)晶？專家有高招。
親愛的安妮：我讀過您的一篇專欄文章，里面提到競業(yè)禁止協(xié)議是否（或者在什么時候）可以協(xié)商，不過我有一個更加古怪的問題。我在一家公司找到了一份不錯的工作，我對這家公司期待已久，但有一件事讓我有所猶豫。這家公司的人力資源部并沒有要求我簽署競業(yè)禁止協(xié)議，而是讓我簽一份他們叫做“轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議”的東西，大意是說公司擁有我的創(chuàng)意或發(fā)明的所有權(quán)利，不論是現(xiàn)在的、還是未來的創(chuàng)意。
這一點讓我有些不安，因為過去五六年里，我一直在業(yè)余時間進(jìn)行某方面的開發(fā)，我認(rèn)為它具有巨大的商業(yè)潛力，而且我即將申請專利。這份協(xié)議是否意味著，盡管我的發(fā)明跟我的工作沒有任何關(guān)系，但我的雇主還是會擁有我的發(fā)明？看起來太奇怪了。還是說，我的解讀有誤？——L.L.G.
親愛的L.L.G.：很遺憾告訴你，你的解讀準(zhǔn)確無誤。轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議，或者所謂“預(yù)先轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議”，通常被掩蓋在競業(yè)禁止協(xié)議的諸多法律條款當(dāng)中。但由于加州宣布競業(yè)禁止協(xié)議違法，這才有了你看到的這個獨立的版本。通常情況下，在這份協(xié)議上簽字就意味著你要把自己所有的智慧結(jié)晶全部轉(zhuǎn)讓給雇主。
圣地亞哥大學(xué)（University of San Diego）法律教授及該校知識產(chǎn)權(quán)法律與市場中心（Center for Intellectual Property Law and Markets）聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人奧利•洛貝爾表示，“各行各業(yè)”的新員工均被要求簽署該類協(xié)議。或許你可以讀一下她的新書《人才需要自由》（Talent Wants to Be Free: Why We Should Learn to Love Leaks, Raids, and Free Riding）。
洛貝爾說：“以前，轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議通常僅適用于被公司聘來專門進(jìn)行創(chuàng)新或發(fā)明的員工。但現(xiàn)在，情況發(fā)生了變化。目前的趨勢是，各家公司都在試圖控制員工的所有創(chuàng)造力，包括技能、創(chuàng)意、發(fā)現(xiàn)和技巧——這些隱性知識并非法律傳統(tǒng)范圍內(nèi)的專利或版權(quán)。”
從你的角度來看，更糟糕的是這些協(xié)議往往會延伸到無限的未來。洛貝爾說：“許多協(xié)議中都包括‘尾部條款’，大意是：‘即便你在離開公司幾年后才完成了發(fā)明，發(fā)明成果依然歸我公司所有。’”
雖然這種協(xié)議看起來非常奇怪，但卻擁有法律效力。《人才需要自由》一書中詳細(xì)介紹了洛貝爾所說的“戰(zhàn)略性訴訟”。在這類訴訟中，公司會起訴之前的員工，尤其是辭職后創(chuàng)業(yè)的員工。這類訴訟的威力足以扼殺一家新公司。洛貝爾說：“訴訟的威脅甚至對投資者而言也是一個巨大的危險信號，不會有風(fēng)險投資者愿意接近你。”
不過，對你來說，有一點是值得高興的。你住在加州。與特拉華州、伊利諾伊州、堪薩斯州、明尼蘇達(dá)州、華盛頓州和北卡羅來納州一樣，加州也通過立法，限制雇主主張擁有員工智慧成果的權(quán)利。
尤其是，加州法院已經(jīng)根據(jù)同一法令，禁止那些限制性過高或持續(xù)時間過長的轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議。不僅如此，加州法律還規(guī)定，只要員工在業(yè)余時間進(jìn)行發(fā)明創(chuàng)造，且并未使用雇主的資源或?qū)Ｓ行畔ⅲ瑒t轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議、包括任何尾部條款，均不具有執(zhí)行力。（沒錯，你的雇主肯定知道這一點，他或許希望你不清楚而已。）
| |
| Dear Annie: I read your column on whether (or when) non-compete agreements are negotiable, but I have a much weirder question. I just got a great job offer from a company where I've always wanted to work, but one thing is giving me pause. The HR people haven't asked me to sign a non-compete, exactly, but they do want me to sign something they're calling an "assignment agreement," which basically says the company owns the rights to all my ideas or inventions, both now and in the future.
This makes me nervous because, for the past five or six years, I've been developing something in my spare time that I think has great commercial potential, and I'm getting close to applying for a patent. Does this agreement mean my employer owns my invention, even though it has nothing to do with my job? That just seems bizarre. Or am I reading this wrong? -- Lost in Los Gatos
Dear L.L.G.: I'm sorry to report that you're probably reading it just fine. Assignment contracts, also called preassignment agreements, are often buried in dense thickets of legalese in non-compete contracts, but since non-competes are illegal in California, you've been presented with the stand-alone version. Typically, it means you're signing over the entire contents of your brain to your employer.
More and more new hires are being asked to sign these contracts "across all industries and in all kinds of jobs," notes Orly Lobel, a law professor at the University of San Diego and cofounder of its Center for Intellectual Property Law and Markets. She also wrote a new book you might want to check out, called Talent Wants to Be Free: Why We Should Learn to Love Leaks, Raids, and Free Riding.
"Assignment agreements used to be mostly confined to people specifically hired to create or invent, but not anymore," Lobel says. These days, "the trend is toward companies trying to control all creativity, including skills, ideas, discoveries, and techniques -- tacit knowledge that isn't subject to patent or copyright under the traditional scope of the law."
The worst part, from your point of view, is that these contracts often stretch into the indefinite future. "Many of them contain a 'trailer clause,' which essentially means, 'Even if you invent something years after you leave here, we will own it anyway,'" Lobel says.
Outlandish as that seems, the agreements have teeth. Talent Wants to Be Free goes into some detail about what Lobel calls "strategic litigation," where companies have sued former employees, especially those who quit to start their own businesses. Such lawsuits can be enough to kill a new company. "Even the threat of litigation is a big red flag to investors," Lobel notes. "Venture capitalists won't come near you."
Your situation does have one bright spot: You live in California. Along with several other states -- including Delaware, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Washington, and North Carolina -- the Golden State has passed laws putting a few limits on employers' right to claim ownership of employees' brainpower.
In particular, California courts have relied on the same statutes that ban non-compete agreements to overturn assignment contracts considered too restrictive or far-reaching. Not only that, but state law says that, as long as you developed your invention in your spare time and without using any of your employer's resources or proprietary information, your assignment agreement -- including any trailer clauses -- can't be enforced. (And yes, your employer no doubt knows that, but may be hoping that you don't.)
|
然而，有時候很難證明某件發(fā)明誕生的具體時間，這也是許多大規(guī)模法律訴訟的爭議焦點。所以，為了在未來可能發(fā)生的法律訴訟中保護(hù)自己，洛貝爾建議保留詳盡的記錄。她說：“記錄下項目目前的進(jìn)度，意味著你在接受這份工作之前已經(jīng)完成了多少。你可以將信息通過信件形式發(fā)送給自己，上面的郵戳可以證明日期。你也可以將到目前為止的成果進(jìn)行公證，如此一來，你不僅有日期，還有公證人作證。”
“然后開始寫日記，記錄下業(yè)余工作的時間，以此來證明在被聘用之后，你是在利用自己的時間（比如在晚上和周末）搞發(fā)明創(chuàng)造。不要忘記使用完全不同的工具和設(shè)備，比如不要用白天上班所用的筆記本。”
洛貝爾表示，剛開始一份新的工作，就要為未來可能發(fā)生的對抗采取預(yù)防措施，這或許會讓你感覺不自在，“就像人們不喜歡婚前協(xié)議一樣”，但在目前情況下，你別無選擇。
她補充說：“我認(rèn)為，這并不是公司與員工之間的問題，而是公司之間的對抗。歸根結(jié)底還是商業(yè)競爭。畢竟，雇主還是要進(jìn)行招聘，他們希望找到最優(yōu)秀的員工。從長期來看，這種限制性的、無效率的協(xié)議對公司也沒有幫助。公共政策必須努力推動允許人才自由流動。”
許多地方正在朝這一方向努力。所以，祝你好運。（財富中文網(wǎng)）
反饋：你是否曾被要求簽署轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議？歡迎評論。
譯者：劉進(jìn)龍/汪皓
| | | Sometimes, however, it's hard to prove when something was invented, and that's been a major point of contention in a few big lawsuits. So, to protect yourself in the event of legal action down the road, Lobel recommends that you keep meticulous records. "Document where you are in your project right now, meaning how much of it you completed before taking this job," she says. "You can mail the information to yourself, so you have a postmark that shows the date. Or get your work product up to now notarized, so you have both the date and an impartial witness.
"Then start a diary, keeping track of your hours so you can show that, after you were hired, you worked on your invention on your own time, evenings and weekends. Don't forget to use entirely separate tools and devices, like a separate laptop from the one you use for your day job."
Lobel notes that you might be ill at ease with the idea of starting a new job while taking precautions against future antagonism -- "It's the same reason lots of people don't like prenuptial agreements" -- but, as things stand, you have little choice.
"To me, the issue is not companies vs. employees, it's companies vs. companies," she adds. "It's all about how businesses compete. After all, employers also have to recruit people, and they want the best employees they can get. So in the long run, these restrictive, inefficient contracts don't help them either. Public policy has to move toward allowing the free flow of talent."
In a few places, it's already going that way. Even so, good luck.
Talkback: Have you ever been asked to sign an assignment agreement? Leave a comment below.
|
|
