Apple 'Suffocates the Creation of New Technologies,' Claims Former Chip Designer Being Sued for Breach of Contract

[Kierkegaarden]

How can this guy claim not claim that the resources available to him while at Apple didn’t contribute to the building of this new company? Seems impossible to prove, so that is why there are contracts signed that try to prevent this scenario. Sounds logical to me.
[automerge]1581711460[/automerge]

I work at a Fortune 15 company. This is almost always an example of sour grapes.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. There will always be ex-employees that are angry at their former employer. They will try to paint them as bad as possible.

 

[konqerror]

Apple makes processors. This guy's new company makes processors. Doesn't matter what the intended application is if the guy had a non-compete in the "processor" business in his contract.

Seems impossible to prove, so that is why there are contracts signed that try to prevent this scenario.

Non-compete clauses are generally illegal and non-enforceable in California, which is a factor often cited to Silicon Valley's success. However, this can lead to messier unintended effects where instead of someone being obviously in conflict with a explicit non-compete clause, companies try to apply e.g. trade secret or patent laws to prevent somebody from leaving.

That's what apparently is going on in this case. Instead of claiming that the former employee started a competing company, which is perfectly legal, they are claiming they started the competing company on Apple's dime.

 

[Freida]

This is wrong on so many levels that I contemplate if its worth it trying to explain why.
Well, I won't but I'll just say this:

Everything these days has a processor some sort. Calculators, home smart looks or even my sous vide cooker. If I apply your analogy then that means that guy has no future and he has to work for McDonnalds.
Please, get real. Designing chips for iOS vs chips for big data centers is totally different thing! Sorry but how is this not obvious?

Apple makes processors. This guy's new company makes processors. Doesn't matter what the intended application is if the guy had a non-compete in the "processor" business in his contract.

 

[whyamihere]

Just so I'm clear... he solicited employees from Apple for his new company, then sues Apple because they are luring his staff away.

Hypocrisy much?

 

[Hodar1]

Apple makes processors. This guy's new company makes processors. Doesn't matter what the intended application is if the guy had a non-compete in the "processor" business in his contract.

Not quite true, and given the legal precedence set by Mr. Roger Ross (formerly lead Engineer for Motorola's RISC Division) before he went on to form MIPS, then worked for SUN Micro-systems where he made RISC processors more mainstream - it boils down to this.

You are NOT PROPERTY. You engage with a company to lease your talents, to further their product. Your talents, your IQ, your intelligence and natural ability existed long before you were interviewed. Just because you designed processors for Apple - does NOT mean that you can never use your brain, your IQ, your natural abilities to work on processors, to earn a living; somewhere else. Regardless what your company's hiring agreement says. To put it in a more basic term - you are not a slave, you are not for sale - you are NEVER anyone's property.

That's what won the case in Austin, TX back in the mid/late 1980's; and that logic has been used in pretty much every other state.

 

[MikeZTM]

There is an incredible interview with Woz in which he talks a lot about how being able to work on the first Apple while at HP was super critical. (Jobs also had his own job not just working on Apple.) Woz went about this the right way, offering HP the opportunity first (they denied). Ironic, though, that Apple is now so focused on denying employees the freedom to do side projects (alluding to comments above more so the legal case) given the freedom HP gave Woz is the reason Apple exists. Read the article as this summary is very light. Link:

http://www.foundersatwork.com/steve-wozniak.html

Obviously Apple is trying hard to kill next Apple.

Even they are not doing business in server market they may threatened by a new ARM server CPU design that may scale down to mobile or inspire others to design a mobile chip in next few years.

 

[2010mini]

So Apples policy is if you previously worked at the company, you should go bake cookies for a living and maybe work on a farm?

I believe him too, because I was following a thread about former Apple employees who were nowhere near this guys level of power, they couldn’t even develop an app on the side, have a YouTube channel or do anything related to tech outside of Apple. Sorry, but Apple needs to be reigned in, Steve Jobs use to work at HP and so many other employees who worked at different tech companies before joining Apple.

The fact that you can’t do it the other way is ridiculous.

Most companies have “none compete” clauses in employee contracts. From the story it seems He signed one, then tried to circumvent it.
Now he is complaining that Apple is enforcing the terms of the contract he signed.

 

[oneMadRssn]

In California, non-compete clauses are generally void. There is more to this story than just that.

Not just California - statutorily prohibiting non-compete agreements for employees is gaining popularity.

Unfortunately the unintended consequence of this is companies have found that trade-secret, non-disclosure, or interference litigation achieves the same result but in a much harsher way. I've worked on several such litigations and they're ugly. It seems like this is no different. Apple couldn't get their way with a non-compete, so they found some other litigious away to get the same thing.

 

[brinary001]

Nuvia? What an original name! It doesn't remind me of nVidia at all. He must be working on an original idea that isn't infringing on Apple's IP at all.

And? What's your point? There's also a vaginal birth control product called NuvaRing. I know it must be a shock to you that things just sound like other things sometimes.

 

[oneMadRssn]

Most companies have “none compete” clauses in employee contracts. From the story it seems He signed one, then tried to circumvent it.
Now he is complaining that Apple is enforcing the terms of the contract he signed.

Non-compete agreements are all unenforceable in California, and other states too, as against public policy.

 

[konqerror]

So Apples policy is if you previously worked at the company, you should go bake cookies for a living and maybe work on a farm?

It's not just Apple, non-compete clauses are used in a wide variety of industries where intellectual property is important.

Non-compete clause - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Non-compete agreements are all unenforceable in California, and other states too, as against public policy.

Other states are North Dakota, Oklahoma, and certain employers in Hawaii. These are exceptions, not the rule.

 

[Mousse]

There is an incredible interview with Woz in which he talks a lot about how being able to work on the first Apple while at HP was super critical. (Jobs also had his own job not just working on Apple.) Woz went about this the right way, offering HP the opportunity first (they denied). Ironic, though, that Apple is now so focused on denying employees the freedom to do side projects (alluding to comments above more so the legal case) given the freedom HP gave Woz is the reason Apple exists.

Google is much maligned, and for good reasons, but they allow their employees to do pet projects on Google's dime and time. As an employee, I'd rather work for Google.

 

[konqerror]

Google is much maligned, and for good reasons, but they allow their employees to do pet projects on Google's dime and time. As an employee, I'd rather work for Google.

It's not as generous as you think... this policy allows Google to claim your pet project is their property because you did it on their dime. It makes it harder to prove that your project to start a new company was done without Google resources and outside Google's time.

Just like how their free food is scheduled to keep you at work after hours.

 

[twolf2919]

So Apples policy is if you previously worked at the company, you should go bake cookies for a living and maybe work on a farm?

I believe him too, because I was following a thread about former Apple employees who were nowhere near this guys level of power, they couldn’t even develop an app on the side, have a YouTube channel or do anything related to tech outside of Apple. Sorry, but Apple needs to be reigned in, Steve Jobs use to work at HP and so many other employees who worked at different tech companies before joining Apple.

The fact that you can’t do it the other way is ridiculous.

That is not Apple's policy. But even if it were, as another poster already pointed out, such "non-compete clauses", these are null and void in CA. So either the thread you followed isn't exactly true or all the folks on it complaining live in states other than CA.

 

[szw-mapple fan]

Apple doesn't do business in the area where he wants to go so this is simply Apple being *******s.
Apple doesn't do data centers so this is a joke. I hope he wins

I don't know where you got that idea but Apple is investing heavily in data centers for iCloud and other services.
[automerge]1581714062[/automerge]

So Apples policy is if you previously worked at the company, you should go bake cookies for a living and maybe work on a farm?

I believe him too, because I was following a thread about former Apple employees who were nowhere near this guys level of power, they couldn’t even develop an app on the side, have a YouTube channel or do anything related to tech outside of Apple. Sorry, but Apple needs to be reigned in, Steve Jobs use to work at HP and so many other employees who worked at different tech companies before joining Apple.

The fact that you can’t do it the other way is ridiculous.

No. Non-compete clauses are illegal in California. The article says "Apple prevented him from engaging in business activities that are directly related to Apple's business," probably meaning that he cannot set up his own or be heavily involved in a business that competes with Apple, not that he cannot be employed at another company in the same business.

 

[guzhogi]

I don't know where you got that idea but Apple is investing heavily in data centers for iCloud and other services.

But not making the actual hardware. I think that's the point. However, while I doubt Apple would do that, but I'm curious to see what an Apple-design datacenter server (and other backend, infrastructure-type hardware for that matter) would be like nowadays. I know they made the xServe, but that died 10 years ago.

 

[az431]

So Apples policy is if you previously worked at the company, you should go bake cookies for a living and maybe work on a farm?

I don't see where anyone has made that claim. He can work wherever he wants and do whatever he wants so long as he doesn't directly compete with Apple. That's pretty standard language in any non-compete.

 

[Jvanleuvan]

Personally, I think non-compete agreements should be unenforceable- from my view of contract law, they should be an "unconscionable" contract as the privileges and obligations on of both parties are grossly out of balance.

In a standard employment contract the employee agrees to supply labor to the employer and the employer agrees to supply payment to the employee, and both parties can exit this agreement at will. - Equal balance of privileges and obligations.

With a non-compete contact the employee must agree to provide his labor to the employer AND be bound to provide labor ONLY to the the employer for the specified time-frame, but the employer has no obligation to maintain this contract for said time-frame, they can terminate, or modify the contract at their will, but the employee will still be bound to their obligations for the full duration - to not provide their labor to any other employer!

This would be like a rental contract where the lessee agrees to pay rent for 1 year, but the landlord reserves the right to change the rent at any time during the lease, or to terminate the lease at will, and STILL demand that the lessee maintain rent payments for the duration of the lease!
beyond any specific rental laws; this contract is unenforceable because of the gross imbalance between the parties!
[automerge]1581715105[/automerge]

I don't see where anyone has made that claim. He can work wherever he wants and do whatever he wants so long as he doesn't directly compete with Apple. That's pretty standard language in any non-compete.

He's an digital circuit engineer, so he can go work on computer board design - oh wait- no apple makes computers...

he can go work on broadband chip design - oh, no apple makes those too....

He can go design computer peripherals - Nope apple makes those too

He can go design video display circuitry - Nope again, Apple makes monitors!

Maybe touchscreen controller boards? - Nope again?

What technology could he apply his PERSONAL expertise too that doesn't, in some way, compete with apple.


He would have to be skilled in a complete different field; maybe if he also has his pilots license! maybe...

 

[szw-mapple fan]

But not making the actual hardware. I think that's the point. However, while I doubt Apple would do that, but I'm curious to see what an Apple-design datacenter server (and other backend, infrastructure-type hardware for that matter) would be like nowadays. I know they made the xServe, but that died 10 years ago.

We don’t really know that. I don’t think AWS or Azure started with making their own hardware but now both of them do. It’s probably not going to be sold to consumers but I wouldn’t be surprised if Apple end up marking their own hardware for in-house use on server farms.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

There is an incredible interview with Woz in which he talks a lot about how being able to work on the first Apple while at HP was super critical. (Jobs also had his own job not just working on Apple.) Woz went about this the right way, offering HP the opportunity first (they denied). Ironic, though, that Apple is now so focused on denying employees the freedom to do side projects (alluding to comments above more so the legal case) given the freedom HP gave Woz is the reason Apple exists. Read the article as this summary is very light. Link:

http://www.foundersatwork.com/steve-wozniak.html

Do you think HP still has that policy? Answer: Hell no.

These nostalgia stories by Wozniak was at a time when Corporate America didn't ever see people owning computers.

So just stop bring this crap up. There is zero relevance to reality.

Having worked at NeXT and Apple I can assure you you can go do your own projects. You just have to get them signed off by the Legal Team and others to determine if what you plan to do isn't already being developed at Apple.

Several of my friends have their own companies today. Several of those geniuses have recently returned to Apple to fix what they see has been broken since the bulk of the NeXT guard left to live on their newfound riches.

This guy is a fool who should have known long ago that his approach won't hold up in court, but he seems to not mind trashing his own reputation in hopes to tarnish Apple a bit.

There are plenty of projects someone of his stature could have pursued after he left Apple. NDAs are what we are talking about here. The man will be dealing with Intellectual Property theft and more by trying to work on his project(s) under the umbrella of Apple, then take members involved in CPU design with him.

He's going to lose this case.
[automerge]1581715421[/automerge]

Personally, I think non-compete agreements should be unenforceable- from my view of contract law, they should be an "unconscionable" contract as the privileges and obligations on of both parties are grossly out of balance.

In a standard employment contract the employee agrees to supply labor to the employer and the employer agrees to supply payment to the employee, and both parties can exit this agreement at will. - Equal balance of privileges and obligations.

With a non-compete contact the employee must agree to provide his labor to the employer AND be bound to provide labor ONLY to the the employer for the specified time-frame, but the employer has no obligation to maintain this contract for said time-frame, they can terminate, or modify the contract at their will, but the employee will still be bound to their obligations for the full duration - to not provide their labor to any other employer!

This would be like a rental contract where the lessee agrees to pay rent for 1 year, but the landlord reserves the right to change the rent at any time during the lease, or to terminate the lease at will, and STILL demand that the lessee maintain rent payments for the duration of the lease!
beyond any specific rental laws; this contract is unenforceable because of the gross imbalance between the parties!
[automerge]1581715105[/automerge]


He's an digital circuit engineer, so he can go work on computer board design - oh wait- no apple makes computers...

he can go work on broadband chip design - oh, no apple makes those too....

He can go design computer peripherals - Nope apple makes those too

He can go design video display circuitry - Nope again, Apple makes monitors!

Maybe touchscreen controller boards? - Nope again?

What technology could he apply his PERSONAL expertise too that doesn't, in some way, compete with apple.


He would have to be skilled in a complete different field; maybe if he also has his pilots license! maybe...

Wrong. NDAs don't preclude someone from leaving a company and then later starting their own projects inside their fields of expertise. Try again.

 

[Surf760]

With, admittedly, not having any details on this besides the MR article, offhand this... sounds like he's complaining that it's terrible that he has to abide by the terms of a non-compete clause in a contract that he willing signed to take the job at Apple.

Non-compete clauses are generally illegal in California, and you can't contract for and illegality. Apple knew that when they put it in his contract. Nonetheless, like many of the posters have said, it's going to be a fact-specific case. Apple doesn't own this guy's brain, but they do own their own IP. We'll see what happens.

 

[Freida]

See the other post from the other user. Logic was missing there I guess

I don't know where you got that idea but Apple is investing heavily in data centers for iCloud and other services.
[automerge]1581714062[/automerge]


No. Non-compete clauses are illegal in California. The article says "Apple prevented him from engaging in business activities that are directly related to Apple's business," probably meaning that he cannot set up his own or be heavily involved in a business that competes with Apple, not that he cannot be employed at another company in the same business.

 

[jimbobb24]

So Apples policy is if you previously worked at the company, you should go bake cookies for a living and maybe work on a farm?

I believe him too, because I was following a thread about former Apple employees who were nowhere near this guys level of power, they couldn’t even develop an app on the side, have a YouTube channel or do anything related to tech outside of Apple. Sorry, but Apple needs to be reigned in, Steve Jobs use to work at HP and so many other employees who worked at different tech companies before joining Apple.

The fact that you can’t do it the other way is ridiculous.

This is almost universally true in tech. I work for a company that does some research. Thats not my job I am more boring, but if I did decide to invent something they own it. I cannot get any new jobs without their permission. If I leave I cannot compete with them for 5 years. Very common stuff.

 

[Tonewheel]

So Apples policy is if you previously worked at the company, you should go bake cookies for a living and maybe work on a farm?

I believe him too, because I was following a thread about former Apple employees who were nowhere near this guys level of power, they couldn’t even develop an app on the side, have a YouTube channel or do anything related to tech outside of Apple. Sorry, but Apple needs to be reigned in, Steve Jobs use to work at HP and so many other employees who worked at different tech companies before joining Apple.

The fact that you can’t do it the other way is ridiculous.

Really? A non-compete clause is Apple's first step...

 

[Freida]

I worked for Apple before and at my times we were not allowed to come up with any app. Apple would own it otherwise. So maybe at your times it was different but when I worked for them these were the rules.

Do you think HP still has that policy? Answer: Hell no.

These nostalgia stories by Wozniak was at a time when Corporate America didn't ever see people owning computers.

So just stop bring this crap up. There is zero relevance to reality.

Having worked at NeXT and Apple I can assure you you can go do your own projects. You just have to get them signed off by the Legal Team and others to determine if what you plan to do isn't already being developed at Apple.

Several of my friends have their own companies today. Several of those geniuses have recently returned to Apple to fix what they see has been broken since the bulk of the NeXT guard left to live on their newfound riches.

This guy is a fool who should have known long ago that his approach won't hold up in court, but he seems to not mind trashing his own reputation in hopes to tarnish Apple a bit.

There are plenty of projects someone of his stature could have pursued after he left Apple. NDAs are what we are talking about here. The man will be dealing with Intellectual Property theft and more by trying to work on his project(s) under the umbrella of Apple, then take members involved in CPU design with him.

He's going to lose this case.
[automerge]1581715421[/automerge]


Wrong. NDAs don't preclude someone from leaving a company and then later starting their own projects inside their fields of expertise. Try again.