The WFH analysis seemed incorrect to me also, as a former lawyer. It seems like the advice is geared toward a potential employee, not a potential contractor. If you're a contractor, it's not true that
> If you work for a software hub, any SaaS app you build over the weekend will belong to the company, regardless of whether you do it with company property or not — as it's related to the company's business.
Also, I'm not sure what to make of this claim:
> Belonging to the company means everything, not just the IP — the revenue, the code, and the good vibes.
Isn't this assumed, for both employment and contracting? If you're writing code for someone, then yes they own the code, the associated IP, the revenue they're going to generate with it, and the "good vibes". Which one of these things would an employee or contractor think he's entitled to?
> If you work for a software hub, any SaaS app you build over the weekend will belong to the company, regardless of whether you do it with company property or not — as it's related to the company's business.
Also, I'm not sure what to make of this claim:
> Belonging to the company means everything, not just the IP — the revenue, the code, and the good vibes.
Isn't this assumed, for both employment and contracting? If you're writing code for someone, then yes they own the code, the associated IP, the revenue they're going to generate with it, and the "good vibes". Which one of these things would an employee or contractor think he's entitled to?