Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Judge Orders Apple's New Hire to Stop Work

non compete agreements never hold up in US courts. Your right to work always overrides a company's interests in these matters. The courts have always ruled you have a right to use your experiences gained at one job to get a better job somewhere else.

You just can't bring or share company secrets with a competitor.

I think loosely the courts could see that Apple and IBM are competitors.
 
I can see both sides to this one. Does make you think though, imagine this was the norm for everyone everywhere. Every time I've left a job I've technically moved on to a competitor. I'd be flippin burgers for a year every time I changed jobs. :confused:
 
rnizlek said:
Last time I checked, IBM stopped selling personal computers when they sold their Thinkpad division to Levano. Though I could be wrong - but I haven't seen or heard of an IBM PC in years.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are wrong. They still sell workstations, which I guess you could say really aren't PCs. And yes, they sold the majority of their PC business to Lenovo, but also bought part of Lenovo in the deal (about 19-20% IIRC), so it's part of IBM. And they also have a marketing deal with Lenovo. So IBM still markets PCs, and puts the IBM brand on them. And by "markets" I mean to say "sells". Though you could argue they're mainly "business" computers and not "personal" computers, that's a distinction without a difference.
 
Too bad he was in NY. :(

If it is filed in California, it is one of the hardest states for the non-compete type contracts to be upheld -- since they are illegal and against public policy there.

May had a recent ruling a few months ago.
 
IBM is concerned about system IP

I think that IBM is concerned about IP and chip design know-how's. I see definite competition between two companies. Also it could be a personal relation issue - that he attracted and caused this hassle, since it is very common for an IBM employee leaves for others - that's how IBM maintains workforce through competition.
 
G5 PowerBook announcement pending

Do you think the judge may be waiting for the G5 Powerbook?:D
 
what people are missing?

what people are missing in the article and the case is the guys who is leaving IBM is not a floor wiping, toilet cleaning guy... He is one of the top executives, and has very important trade secrets in his experience within the company...

NON-COMPETE laws at certain levels can be made 100% legal for certain period of time!

Think of it this way, you are a GENERAL of The Army, and you quit your job to Join Russian Army, how is that sound?

Sounds a bit extreme right, and you can say it is a different story, well it is different story but same principal... if you get it...
 
IBM and Apple ARE competitors

This is stupid of him to suggest that Apple and IBM aren't competitors. That argument would have worked fine if he were going from Victoria Secret to Minute Maid Orange juice. Not so much here.
 
how can people say they dont compete?

ibm develops chips

apple is researching/developing arm chips

to say they dont compete is to say you have knowledge of each companies roadmap and fact is you dont

ibm is fully justified in doing this
 
Local TV weatherguy (Milwaukee, WI) jumped ship to another station under a covenant a few years ago.. He could work at the new station behind-the-scenes, just not in front of the camera for at least a year.

Anti-compete clauses don't seem fair to the employee, but if you sign the contract, too bad.
 
skubish said:
non compete agreements never hold up in US courts. Your right to work always overrides a company's interests in these matters. The courts have always ruled you have a right to use your experiences gained at one job to get a better job somewhere else.

You just can't bring or share company secrets with a competitor.

I think loosely the courts could see that Apple and IBM are competitors.
Click to expand...

The US company I work for has consistently and 100% successfully sued every employee who signed a non-compete, left the company and then violated the terms of that non-compete. They DO hold up in court. We've won at least a dozen in court, and had at least that many cases settled in our favor before going to court.

Depending on the specific terms of the contract, IBM can at the very least keep this guy from holding a key position at Apple for whatever length of time the contract stipulates.
 
At least Apple complied with the order. I guess they don't want to start a fight on this. It's not Apple's nature. :) Let him wait a year. And besides: If he starts a lawsuit against IBM the court won't judge any faster than that.
 
I've seen a lot of non-compete clauses and they are all different. No one has posted here the exact wording of the non-compete that IBM has. So all we have is speculation.

The US courts HAVE enforced non-competes. Results vary with the state. A few years back we have an employee leave and we prevented him from joining a competitor via his non-compete. We just called his new compamy and told them about the non-compete and they said fine, end of story.

Theses cases are heard in STATE courts so it can vary with the state, judge, and content of the agreement.
 
dukebound85 said:
once again, you cant be serious....

when you sign something saying you cant compete or whatnot, then you are agreeing to it. if you dont like it, dont work there. otherwise be prepared to suffer the consequences legally
Click to expand...


Hattig said:
European vs American view I guess.
Click to expand...

It's a European view that contracts and agreements don't have to be followed? :confused:

I'm with Dukebound on that point. If you sign a legally binding agreement, don't just expect to be able to walk away without penalty.

On the other hand, if IBM had previously identified which companies were considered "competitors", and if Apple's name wasn't mentioned, nor was it on a list of some sort, then he should be allowed to keep the job.
 
This would be an issue for the courts in California? Each state has its own laws in this regard.

A few years ago I took a job that was requiring me to sign a really ridiculous non-compete (Florida). I had a lawyer look it over, and he said it was total rubbish- most of the clauses I was concerned about had no legal standing whatsoever. I don't remember the particulars, but it was written in a way that would basically prohibit me from working almost anywhere, for quite a while after leaving (over a year.) Well, as a software engineer and not a 20 million a year CEO, I couldn't afford to not work for over a year, or take some job that didn't make any use of my earning potential.

Anyway, I recall him saying that CA's laws in this regard were some of the most favorable in the nation to the employee. I can see a need for this kind of thing for high value guys like Papermaster who could actually transfer some level of IP from one company to another. But for the average working joe it seems a little ridiculous.
 
dukebound85 said:
how can people say they dont compete?

ibm develops chips

apple is researching/developing arm chips
Click to expand...

But Apple isn't selling their chips. They only use them in their own products.

Thus, IBM sells chips. Apple does not.

Apple sells iPods and iPhones and personal computers. IBM does none of these.

Now, I'm not a lawyer, the courts may say they're competitors. But surely you can see how people can at least SAY they're not competitors, right? They don't sell the same products at all.
 
Small White Car said:
But Apple isn't selling their chips. They only use them in their own products.

Thus, IBM sells chips. Apple does not.

Apple sells iPods and iPhones and personal computers. IBM does none of these.

Now, I'm not a lawyer, the courts may say they're competitors. But surely you can see how people can at least SAY they're not competitors, right? They don't sell the same products at all.
Click to expand...

Apple is selling them, but inside their computers.
 
maybe I am just naive but rarely do employees really seek out to screw their former employers, if anything it is to find an environment that is more agreeable w/out needing ramp-up time while staying in the same salary bracket.

Guess as I live in TX and have worked for 3 companies in CA, they can ask me to sign whatever but good luck enforcing it.

Maybe management and the companies they work for should try and _*suck less*_ then people would be happier and just stay put (blah blah blah advancement, growth, etc yadda yadda yadda whatever... most content people will stay).

bring the flames....
 
So if IBM wins their lawsuit, does that mean Papermaster will

1. Go back to Blue? Seems a little dangerous to re-cross that now-smoldering bridge.

2. Go to Apple, and IBM will be awarded monetary penalties (doubtful if the courts will issue a stop-work order).

3. Twist in the wind for a year?

4. Take a "sponsored" vacation for a year?

I imagine Apple would have known the risks in making the offer, as much as Papermaster did in accepting it. Is Steve obligated in any way to renumerate him for any loss of wage damages in the interim?
 
guess everyone does own something to IBM , so stop scalding on IBM please. Wherever this fellow is, i bet he can help to produce the next big thing for us all
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back