Hacker News Reader

It's usually not malicious, but lazy. You'll have to propose an alternative.

I've seen similar and asked a lawyer to amend it to something like material created using office owned equipment. If you want to go one better, you'll have to say that it's material created for work purposes and then define what the work purpose is.

An hour of the lawyer's time is probably cheaper than two hours of your time trying to research better words, and they'll likely get it right.

View on HN

Thanks for the comment. Yeah, I asked a lawyer check out my last contract, which had the same thing. I'm just trying to gauge how common this is. A lot of employers don't seem to want to remove said clauses.

It's all a bit chicken and egg. You need leverage to get said clauses removed, but to have such leverage, you need to be somebody in demand ... which means you usually need to have at some point realised something of value yourself, which you can't do if you down own the IP rights.

"It's usually not malicious, but lazy."

This is a very accurate description of most contracts/laws, and government in general.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com