Recently, a colleague quietly handed me his phone during dinner. He was considering charging for a small app he created on weekends and wanted to know if there were any issues with his company contract.

We opened the employment documents together. Attached was a multi-page addendum titled "Invention Assignment."

The language was broader than expected. It stated that any inventions or works created during employment would belong to the company, but there was no mention of working hours anywhere.

I could see my colleague's face tense up. In fact, many American employees sign this document without remembering its contents.

First, let's clarify the basic principle. U.S. federal copyright law includes the concept of work made for hire.

Any work created by an employee within the scope of their job is treated as being authored by the company from the outset. This can include code, designs, and writing.

The issue arises with results outside the scope of work. By default, these belong to the individual, but if the contract broadens that scope, the situation changes.

Some states have drawn clear lines in the law. A notable example is California Labor Code Section 2870.

This provision states that inventions made entirely on an employee's own time, without using company equipment, facilities, or trade secrets, are exempt from assignment. However, exceptions apply if the invention relates to the company's business or actual planned research and development.

States with similar laws include Delaware, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, New Jersey, North Carolina, Utah, and Washington. New York also joined this list with the governor's signature on September 15, 2023.

Among these, California, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, and Washington require companies to inform employees of this right in writing. This is why you may find the full legal text attached at the end of contracts.

What about Maryland? Unfortunately, Maryland is classified as a state without such specific laws.

In the 2020 session, a House bill (HB 1466) was introduced to invalidate assignment clauses for intellectual property created on personal time. However, there is no record of it being confirmed as law after committee hearings.

Ultimately, this means that in Maryland, the wording of the contract itself becomes the most important criterion. Since state law does not provide protection, the signed language holds significant weight.

From a historical perspective, this has been a long-standing battle. The question of how far employers can claim ownership of employee inventions has been litigated since the industrial era.

As a result, two established legal concepts have emerged. One is the principle of hired to invent, which states that inventions made by someone hired to invent belong to the company.

The other is shop right. If an employee creates an invention using company time or equipment, ownership remains with the employee, but the company has the right to use it without charge.

Therefore, the practical points to check narrow down to three: when was it created, what was used to create it, and does it overlap with company business?

Let's start with the timing issue. If there is a record of you making a few lines of code on a company laptop during lunch, that line could become the starting point of a dispute later.

The scope of equipment is also broader than expected. Company cloud accounts, software licenses paid for by the company, and even ideas shared on internal messaging platforms can all leave traces.

The most ambiguous aspect is business relevance. The larger the company, the broader the scope of its business, so a project you think is unrelated may be claimed as relevant by the company.

So, if it were me, I would do this: I would specifically list ongoing projects in the Prior Inventions section of the employment documents.

If you are already employed, you can explain your side project to HR or your supervisor and get written confirmation. Even an email with a date-stamped record is important.

It's also crucial to strictly adhere to the principles of using personal equipment, personal accounts, and off-hours. If a Git commit timestamp falls during work hours, explaining it can become quite tedious.

My colleague eventually sent a brief inquiry email to the company's legal team. He decided to postpone the launch until he received a response.

It may feel frustrating, but I believe it was a wise choice. If a dispute arises after the launch, it could jeopardize the users and revenue he has built up.

Finally, I want to add one more thing. The interpretation of contracts varies based on wording, state law, and the scope of the company's business, so if financial interests are at stake, I recommend consulting an employment attorney.

On the weekend, while enjoying pancakes drizzled with maple syrup, take a moment to pull out your employment documents. It only takes 10 minutes, and that 10 minutes could protect years of effort.