|
SledgeHammer01 wrote: I meant if they said "we own your code... or we can do this in court", would you go to court?
No, to the local newspaper - in an attempt to find out how messy it can get 
I are Troll 
|
|
|
|
|
SledgeHammer01 wrote: I meant if they said "we own your code... or we can do this in court", would you go to court?
nope. I would hand them some crappy look a like library that barely functions and is almost 100% to cause an error and then move on...lol
" What code? on this pc? no code on this pc are you crazy? oh on that pc? nope none over there either."
oops i forgot to mention the drive hidden in my sock drawer that has my backup files in case my pc ever gets stolen again.....
Programming is a race between programmers trying to build bigger and better idiot proof programs, and the universe trying to build bigger and better idiots, so far... the universe is winning.
|
|
|
|
|
SledgeHammer01 wrote: we own your code
No one owns my code. I have copyright, but I don't own it.
SledgeHammer01 wrote: would you go to court?
I wouldn't, and if they did, so what? It wouldn't affect what I do.
SledgeHammer01 wrote: , if the company *wants* to be a-holes, they definitely can and will win
But they won't gain anything -- it's all loss.
"The more you tighten your grip, Tarken, the more star systems will slip through your fingers." -- Leia
SledgeHammer01 wrote: if the company *wants* to be a-holes
Then few will work for them and do a good job.
|
|
|
|
|
I had this as a clause when I worked at Accenture.
|
|
|
|
|
My understanding about Accenture is that they thought you should be working at all times, so you had no free time to cook up ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
Not wrong 50-60 hour weeks were not uncommon and I wasn't even in the consulting stream. My overtime took my pay nearly up to theirs with one key difference: I actually had a basic understanding of Computer Science, rather than a 2:1 in history with a two week Java course in Chicago.
When I got there, they made me write asynchronous http handlers from scratch (my previous job had been as a sole developer churning out a SOAP/ASP.NEt application to handle online billing so you can imagine how hard that was). Instead of letting me cut any code I had to totally (and I mean down to psuedo code/flow chart level) specify the classes I was due to write. In the end I coded it at home (in my copius free time) and reverse engineered the PRINCE2 style cr*p when I got to work. I had a hell of a time, and it knocked my confidence for a good few months. I was shifted to the web team where I settled nicely for two weeks, then they moved me into UAT test, this knocked me back again as I thought they'd done this because I'd made a hash of it. Later the project leader said he saw what was happening, but couldn't get hold of me to let me know that this was purely because they needed a "resource" on UAT post-haste and I was the only one who didn't have long term commitments. The move was actually to ensure they could renew my contract and bring me back to phase 2.
I eventually left when they agreed to put me in charge of a team. First I was put into a dev team with one of the consultants in charge (2 weeks Java + on the Job experience) as he needed to get promoted otherwise he'd be sacked in the next "laddering round". To be fair, they did put me in charge of the UAT test team as I'd knocked about 2 man-months off the process, that's when I left. When I left uni I could design a simple eight-bit processor from logic gates, but they thought the best use for my talents was kludging UAT scripts in test partner. Having said that, when it started going well I enjoyed it (except for the hours) it was just the lack of prospects that made me leave.
|
|
|
|
|
Many companies require you to sign an IP agreement that gives them everything you write. It's hard to refuse when there are ten other people competing for the same job. In some places (like California) agreements like this are illegal.
Sometimes they give you a reasonable agreement to sign when you accept a job, then a few days later after you've turned down other job offers, they give you a more restrictive agreement to sign. This should be illegal.
modified on Wednesday, April 20, 2011 10:04 AM
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, what industry do you work in? Those agreements sound horrible. My ugly agreements I sign are less about IP rights and more about going to client or competitor, etc.
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming "Wow! What a Ride!"
— Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
|
|
Mine have always been about IP.
|
|
|
|
|
I live in California and I had to sign a "they own my brain 24x7" clause. Dunno if its enforceable in court though. As I mentioned in another post, I used to know a guy who called BS on things like this and said if it happened to him he would go to court "because its illegal and I will win". I would just roll my eyes and laugh a) he doesn't have the money to go to court [well, maybe he does, but he certainly doesn't have enough to flush $200k down the toilet on a lawyer] b) the company has alot more resources and lawyers then he could possibly ever have -- so the company could certainly beat him in court just by dragging it out and bankrupting him. He might win in the end, but if he can't pay, no lawyer is going to take up his fight for free.
I had another co-worker try to sue the state on a frivilous lawsuit and he lost. So the state immediately turned around and p0wned him for lawyer fees. $200k. Lolz. Right now I think he still owes them $200k, but hes trying to find somebody to appeal it.
|
|
|
|
|
Unless you signed something crazy, I would not worry much. However if you plan on bringing your "bag of tricks" to work, and to be able to use it in the future or at other jobs, could you possibly apply for a license for it that you own. That way, you can, in writing give permission to your current company to use, and use when you're gone, but also reserve the right to use it on future endeavors.
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming "Wow! What a Ride!"
— Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
|
|
Another guy mentioned that using it "under the radar" won't raise any flags, but if I bring it up to my boss to make it official, he'll have to care and flags will be raised for sure :p. I haven't decided if I'll "under the radar" it or not. I don't really plan on leaving at this time, so it would be kind of lame to not use it .
|
|
|
|
|
It depends on what you signed when you were hired. Some companies say that anything you develop anywhere is company property. Some say that if it's done with company resources oor on company time, it belongs to them. If you developed it at home, and it's just a generic library/assembly) that contains miscellaneous techniques and code containing no proprietary company data or code that was developed under the corporate time/resources umbrella, he'd probably have a hard time legally seizing the code as company property.
I'm not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
I have never been called out for developing at home because I make it very clear to perspective employers that I code at home as a hobby, and that any techniques I learn in the course of work is impossible to "un-know", and short of proprietary info or algorythms, I apply knowledge gained at work (and elsewhere) in my own personal code. I've never had anyone call me out on it, and I've been coding for a living for 30 years.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
Nice. You really are an outlaw .
|
|
|
|
|
I found this statement on a forum discussing this very matter:
You can distribute your code under an open source license and you should try to convince your employer to allow you to "contribute" to the package which would allow you to maintain your software on company time.
This sounds like a viable approach.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
Can we change the contrast settings programaticaly?
I mean, after changing, the impact can be seen in the monitor menu of contrast figure .
|
|
|
|
|
You can in Vista or higher by p/invoking the SetMonitorContrast function. Alternatively, you can use the method listed here[^].
|
|
|
|
|
Alternative is associated with Brightness. Please correct me if I am misunderstanding it.
I was looking for some sample code to change contrast. Can you please provide some piece of code associated with SetMonitorContrast function
|
|
|
|
|
No sample code but P/Invoke isn't generally particularly difficult.
The SetMonitorContrast API function is here[^]. It appears that you will need to use other functions too so the whole Monitor Configuration Functions[^] section may be of interest.
For converting the C/C++ code to C# methods there are plenty of resources around, Luc has a good article on his blog and there is the interop toolkit which is a free download that does it all for you (no fun that way but useful if you don't like to get your hands dirty!).
|
|
|
|
|
abcurl wrote: Can you please provide some piece of code associated with SetMonitorContrast
function
Is Google broken there? I told you the exact API to search for - how hard can the rest be?
|
|
|
|
|
I have the following code in one project file. It works just fine and has for a long time:
if (qrySearchResults.Rows.Count > 0)
{
this.Hide();
SearchResults sr = new SearchResults();
sr.ShowDialog();
this.Show();
}
Then I added this to a new project (and solution) I'm doing and get an error message:
if (queryResults.Rows.Count > 0)
{
this.Hide();
SearchResults resultsWindow = new SearchResults();
resultsWindow.ShowDialog();
this.Show();
}
I'm essentially doing the same thing yet get an error on the new one saying that it can't access something that has already been disposed of. So I added:
if (!this.IsDisposed)
{
this.Show();
}
and now it works. Why would the first project work fine without this additional code but the second one has to have it?
[EDIT] I should say that the 'resultsWindow' has two buttons. Either Search Again or Close. If they Close, I close this search criteria window in the results Window and if they choose search again, then I want this to show again so I just close the results window.[/EDIT]
I'm using VS2008 in a Winforms project. It is possible the first project was created with VS2005 but not sure. I didn't do it. I promise!
I have nothing more to say.
|
|
|
|
|
Long variable names break your code! 
Seriously though, you should use the return value of ShowDialog to decide whether to re-show the form. (Set the result by putting DialogResult properties on the buttons.) Closing it from within resultsWindow will result in the behaviour that you describe because that will happen before ShowDialog returns, so when you call Show, resultWindow has already killed the form. Pulling the rug out from underneath an executing form like that is rude.
|
|
|
|
|
This is the code I used in the resultsWindow:
private void cmdClose_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
SearchCriteria sc = (SearchCriteria)Application.OpenForms["SearchCriteria"];
sc.Close();
SearchCriteria.impDS.Dispose();
this.Close();
}
This is the code from the previous project:
SearchInput si = (SearchInput)Application.OpenForms["SearchInput"];
si.Close();
SearchInput.ds1.Dispose();
this.Close();
So you can see I do the exact same thing and the other code works fine without checking. I agree that there are better ways. Thanks for pointing out checking what ShowDialog returns. I'll look into doing that.
BobJanova wrote: Pulling the rug out from underneath an executing form like that is rude
I didn't mean to be rude. 
I have nothing more to say.
|
|
|
|
|
twohowlingdogs wrote: So you can see I do the exact same thing and the other code works fine without checking.
If the behaviour is different, then there "must" be a difference. The check on "this" implies that "this" might be disposed, before the dialog is closed. Are you calling an explicit dispose on that particular form somewhere?
I are Troll
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: If the behaviour is different, then there "must" be a difference.
I will not argue with that! I just can't find it! 
I don't think I'm calling a Dispose anywhere else. I'll look into that! What I said I'm doing in the first post is working and working correctly. So I'm not worried, but considering how I am, I would like to find out why!
I have nothing more to say.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
