Clarify whether agreement has been used to cover businesses (vs just individuals)

[patcon]

Hi! First off, I really appreciate this being made available.

I'm wondering whether anyone has knowledge of whether GitHub has used this agreement for contracting services from business entities, for whom a representative might sign.

Thanks!

[mlinksva]

No. I don't have any knowledge of it being used in that way.

[copiesofcopies]

@patcon the kinds of services agreement you're describing typically strike a different balance than the average employee assignment agreement. In my experience, those agreements commonly limit copyright assignment to deliverables produced for the contracting entity (and ideally specifically identified in a statement of work). For this reason, the issue addressed by the Balanced Employee IP Agreement doesn't appear as often in this type of agreement. Which is not to say there aren't plenty of examples that (IMO) overreach in this way, it's just not the mode as it is with employee assignment agreements.

[patcon]

Thanks @mlinksva!

So if GitHub ever contracts service from a company entity (or an individual operating under one), would they just have each person sign it individually? Or is that likely a whole different process/agreement?

[BenjamenMeyer]

Thanks @mlinksva!

So if GitHub ever contracts service from a company entity (or an individual operating under one), would they just have each person sign it individually? Or is that likely a whole different process/agreement?

They wouldn't need to. Corp-to-Corp contracts are delivery based, and the corporate entity providing the service would need to have clear license to deliver against the contract. The employment agreements and contracts would be what would authorize them to do that. The entity requesting the work would rely on and enforce that entity doing the work can actually do so.