In a copy of the document leaked to the magazine PC World, the company states that if you identify yourself as an Apple employee you “should ensure that content associated with you is consistent with Apple policies”.
External_Floppy wrote:I hope after that moving tribute you won't be identifying yourself as an Apple employee.
A quote from a piece on the guy who got sacked after he vented on Facebook.In a copy of the document leaked to the magazine PC World, the company states that if you identify yourself as an Apple employee you “should ensure that content associated with you is consistent with Apple policies”.
External_Floppy wrote:This is normal? 'All your thoughts are belong to us!' sprung to mind when I read it. The mantra of a cult.
External_Floppy wrote:Plus, if it's normal then why would it need to be 'leaked'...?
Nuke wrote:As I said it has been normal in the large companies for which I have worked. Moreover my wife has worked for small companies in which the boss has gone ape on hearing that an employee has been talking about it in anything but marketing sound bites.
A close relation of mine works for a US company (in the UK) ... He also writes OSS as a hobby ... and has several web sites. He must let them scrutinise everything before public release to ensure it does not infringe any of their copyrights, reveal any of their trade secrets, or suggest any connection with themselves. This practice is more widespread than you might be led to believe.
I am not sold on Freedom of Information myself. I have always worked in heavy industry, for certain companies that have been fashionable for people to bash, and have seen information released to the public in good faith only to be deliberately twisted around, quoted out of context and otherwise abused by opponents and their clever lawyers.
For once I take Apple's side.
That's infringing the right to free speech, not to freedom of information. I believe that one of these is enshrined in the American Constitution, the other is not.
nelz wrote:Letting them "clear" his code is a good idea. It's opensource, so they can read it anyway, but by allowing them to approve it they can't later turn round and claim IP theft, which they might otherwise be tempted to try if he left to work for a competitor.
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest