[GianFabien]

IANAL either. I believe that UK law would be similar to that in Australia.

To the best of my understanding, as an employee the IP of all work you produce is owned by the company. Even as a contractor you need rather specific contracts if your work for hire is not to be owned by the client.

My first reaction is to advise you to let the idea go. The most likely outcome is that you will do a huge amount of work and then get caught up in legal nightmares. Getting legal advice up front won't spare you from more drama down the track.

Assuming that there are many companies that use the same software and have similar needs, then you have the option of leaving, developing a MVP and then selling it to other companies first and eventually to your ex-employer. Even then there are risks of being accused of taking proprietary information to enrich yourself. Another scenario is that the big-name company could beat you to the market with a poorly designed but aggressively marketed alternative to your solution.

[mattmanser]

You're wrong.

In the UK, if you develop it in your free time it's yours, as long as you don't use company equipment.

However! It can be a clause in your contract to say sompany owns IP developed in free time, and is enforceable. Sometime there's often an extra clause saying unless an exemption is approved by the board (I assume to stop hirers informally saying 'oh don't worry about that', being legally valid).

I have asked companies to remove that clause and had it removed.

In another company a friend of mine had a small side project that was making money when he joined, and that company were fine waiving the clause. But those were smaller companies who were reasonable, bigger companies might not wiggle.

[ptero]

IMO virtually all tech companies have such clauses that IP employees develop belongs to the company. For example to prevent employees from using their knowledge to build a competitor and and steal clients or similar products at half price. My 2c.

[williamdclt]

I think non-compete clauses and existing company IP are what prevent employees from doing this, not the “anything you do in your free time is our IP” clauses

[jxjnskkzxxhx]

> In the UK, if you develop it in your free time it's yours, as long as you don't use company equipment.

I'm in the UK. My contract specifically says that anything I produce while employed for the company, even in my free time, is owned by the company. So is your claim that the contract is illegal/unenforceable?

[ukoki]

Your contract is legal and enforceable. The parent commenter is just saying that there's no _automatic_ right to work you do in your free time (ie it has to be specifically mentioned in the contract). You could try and negotiate that clause out of your contract though.

[chrismorgan]

Yeah, it’s completely wrong for Australia too. Never actually seen such a clause in an employment contract either, though I’ve only ever worked for smaller companies. I did once encounter a legally-unenforceable non-compete which I got removed easily. (Wish there was some sort of penalty for illegal contract clauses, because of their chilling effect.)

[worthless-trash]

Its not completely wrong, I have seen it in two of my Australian employment contracts.

[chrismorgan]

Reread the comment I was responding to. It’s about what the default is.

[worthless-trash]

I stand by my statement.

[octo888]

IME it's a very common contract clause

So de facto they're not that wrong (contract law is law too)