I recently joined a large IT company, before joining I had concerns with my contract, it states that they own all rights over what I create (from ideas, software, you name it).

I love making my own games, and I have a game I've worked on for over 2 years (long before I joined their company), so I did not like this part of the contract and said I could not sign unless they confirm that they won't try to take my game from me.

I sent an email to the recruiter (who works for that company) and asked her to confirm that point X.x of the contract is only concerning products competing with the company. I got the response:

As previously highlighted you do not need to be stressed at all in regards to below situation with your company. As I have explained to you what we protect us against in the contract is competing business, if that was the case with yours. So I hereby can confirm below is the case – and that it would only be an issue if you develop a competing product or use our inside know how to create your business products. Hope that makes sense. So ALL is good.

I felt like this was enough, but now I'm about to release my game and I really don't like the wording in the contract. Will this email I have protect me from them trying to steal my game?

I am located in Scandinavia.

  • 1
    If you're not satisfied with the language or are concerned about the potential ramifications, you should definitely speak with a lawyer who can advise you on the specific language you're looking at.
    – Michael
    May 22, 2017 at 20:32

1 Answer 1


One can argue that you should always be worried. Much more so when you are addressing legal questions without the legal advice of a qualified attorney.

The email you got from your company says something. It offers "protection" to the extent that:

  1. Your written contract doesn't have an integration clause.
  2. The person who sent the email is authorized to modify the written contract.
  3. The contents of the email do in fact address the concerns you have.
  4. There are no laws that constrain the principles and interests at stake.

Only your lawyer, paid for by you to act in your interest, could verify these questions and offer an opinion on your legal vulnerability.

  • 1
    In most jurisdictions, if the person is ostensibly authorised (I.e. it's reasonable to assume that they are) then it doesn't matter if they are actually authorised.
    – Dale M
    May 22, 2017 at 21:04
  • Sweden background, wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/se/se124en.pdf, Art 40a " The copyright in a computer program created by an employee as a part of his tasks or following instructions by the employer is transferred to the employer unless otherwise agreed in contract".
    – user6726
    May 23, 2017 at 1:09
  • @user6726 This was not created "following instructions by the employer". I started it years before I started working for that company.
    – Green_qaue
    May 23, 2017 at 8:19
  • Right, so the point is that it doesn't meet the requirement for automatic assignment, under Swedish law. I don't know if Denmark.
    – user6726
    May 23, 2017 at 13:55

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .