They Made Me an Offer I Couldn't Refuse (1997)
Key topics
The debate rages on around companies claiming copyright on employees' work, with some commenters outraged by the draconian contracts that essentially own anything an employee creates, regardless of its relation to their job. Others point to existing laws and collective agreements in places like Austria and California that protect employees' intellectual property rights, sparking a discussion on the potential for collective action or uniform working contracts. As one commenter wryly noted, if all employees and companies followed the same rules, "you don't need to engage in this rigmarole and the company just never owns anything you do unless it's directly related to your job." The thread highlights the tension between corporate interests and employee rights, a timely and relatable issue.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
4d
Peak period
26
96-108h
Avg / period
12
Based on 36 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Dec 23, 2025 at 5:38 PM EST
11 days ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Dec 27, 2025 at 4:07 PM EST
4d after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
26 comments in 96-108h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Dec 28, 2025 at 10:11 AM EST
6d ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
To which the HR person at the orientation had said, "Don't worry Google wouldn't do that." And this individual said, "I'm sure they wouldn't, that's why it seems like a no-brainer to put it into the agreement, it just says they won't do something that you and I both agree they would never do. I can't sign the document as written without this." The HR person took the updated version off to someone (presumably legal). And then after lunch this person was not in the group (I had seen them eating lunch) So when we had finished up, before my mentor had arrived I went out and found them waiting on the circle for a ride and asked them what happened. They said, "Google said no and also said they were rescinding the offer of employment."
And that told me everything I needed to know about how Google really thought about things vs what they said they thought about things.
[1] They rationalized this when I was there with their "20% time rule" which was time to work on what ever you wanted, but working on whatever you wanted still belonged to Google because they had a unlimited right of first refusal to productize whatever it was you worked on.
If you work for a big tech, there's a huge range of stuff that's related to your employer's business, which means you have to tread carefully.
What you describe doesn't really provide much signal about this, because a big corp will always have a huge interest in having uniform working contracts. Exceptions are possible but only worth the headache with them for fairly high level employees. So even for a clause that they really wouldn't care much about, you'd expect a similar reaction.
Then when the work contract came up, there were some unusual clauses about my salary that I was not comfortable with. They first said that it was OK to ignore the clause as they would pay my salary as explained orally. I insisted that they write the work contract as they plan to pay me. After about 1 week of back and forth, they admitted that the clause was indeed unusual, was there for historical reasons and that they plan to change it in the future. However, they said no clause in the contract could be changed as of now, as it was the same contract for every employee, and no past had employee ever complained about it.
Unfortunately, I ended up declining the offer, as I considered the risk was not worth it.
Then what they choose for that uniform tells us a lot.
I don't believe that any corporation would ever reward me for any reason; so without a side project, I wouldn't have hope... How would I get out of bed in the morning to go to work, without hope?
I don't think therapy would help me to be honest. My problem is not psychological; it's that I need more money to buy my time and freedom. One time I was earning a modest passive income for about 3 years while working on open source projects; I was quite happy then and the fact that I didn't trust anyone was not a problem as I wasn't forced to interact with anyone.
I guess one positive aspect about this feeling of 'not caring' and putting on a mask is that it comes across as confidence and it gives me more control. I can say unexpected things and control other people's emotions to some extent.
When you're always willing to throw away the entire relationship in every interaction, people tend to respect you more for some reason. It's like; if you don't value the relationship, it signals high status or something. I suppose this is the trick that psychopaths use?
Do that for two or three promotions and you can leave with enough saved up to make all your projects side projects.
I've related elsewhere[0] my story about how Google laid me and half my team off 2 weeks before we were set to receive a six-figure retention bonus following an acquisition.
In the original Q&A with corp dev just after the acquisition was announced, someone pointed out that the contract we were offered allowed for that sort of thing. Google's representative said something similar to the parent comment: "Don't worry, that's not something we actually do."
It was especially galling because, after a round of layoffs a year or two prior to the acquisition, that startup had issued retention bonuses to those of us who were left. Unlike Google's subsequent post-acquisition bonus, contracts for those bonuses explicitly stated they were payable even if we were subsequently laid off or fired, as long as we weren't fired for one of a few specific reasons like embezzlement or harassment or other serious workplace misconduct.
It was such a marked contrast and, like the parent comment, it told me all I needed to know about how Google really feels about its employees, and how very literally true the old saying of "you can't trust what you don't have in writing" is.
Big companies are soulless.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43680191
The real rule as always is do not get in a legal fight with your employer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orkut
If the software is different from what all 4 companies would produce and it is all built outside of business hours over long periods of time whilst having worked for different companies, it gives you full leverage.
The company which actually wants your software would be better off just paying you than even thinking of getting tangled up in such mess.
My company was acquired by another company that had in-house lawyers. California Law states that you have rights to your own IP, when produced on your hardware and on your own time. So, I was careful to air gap all my work on a separate computer. Meanwhile, the acquiring company ask me to sign an employment agreement. Its terms restated the California law in very ambiguous terms. I couldn't tell if I was declaring rights to my own IP or signing away my rights. So, I asked them: "which is it?" Their replay was "Yes." ... I was an employee for a day.
You're right that California has IP assignment limitation clauses that override anything in the boilerplate employment contracts. I know one person who blew up their job offer by trying to get it modified to limit the IP assignment clause, but the company had a hardline stance that they didn't do one-off contracts with employees. Later they realized their state had already limited IP assignment, so the entire battle was moot.
Things that are done in the course of employment (but aren't part of the contractual obligations) would often need to be disclosed and the company could license it. IP would typically still be owned by the employee.
Obviously things done outside of work would be even more clearly owned by the employee.
I wonder if any other country has a similar system.
Many states in the United States have limitations on IP assignment that protect against overly broad contracts.
Employers write their contracts as broadly as possible with the understanding that state limitations will limit any overly broad claims.
California (where Google is headquartered) is one such state with IP assignment limitations, though I'm not sure how much of that was in place when this article was written nearly 3 decades ago.
Apple is also headquartered in California, so the same applies.
Two days later the network admin of the company stopped by my desk and whispered in my ear, "They're looking at your employment contracts. Whatever you showed them, they are trying to figure out if they can take it for free." (I guess he was reading all their emails...)
Bad news for them: they'd been in such a bind to hire me originally that I'd taken a pen and scribbled out a large chunk of my employment contract before we signed it. I'd never have thought to try it, but someone with bigger balls than me had done it the day before on theirs and told me about it.