or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by TBell

I find it silly that some people seem to think it nefarious for partners to agree not to actively target each other's employees. I also fail to see how employees were harmed. If they were unhappy where they worked, they could do what most people do, look for advertised positions and apply for them.Non-compete agreements are not part of the at issue matter, but I am not opposed to them provided they are only used for in certain situations and are negotiated fairly.
I on the other hand can't defend absolutes. The companies involved were being hurt largely by head hunters who on behalf of a certain company would target employees from certain companies for particular jobs. These employees were not activity seeking work at the companies at issue or they could have just applied on their own for posted positions. You apparently think companies should be forced to actively poach other companies employees, which represents another type of...
Ask Apple if it could do things differently would it chose a jury in its eBook case.
  You do realize the companies actually had a defense, and would have drawn this out in Court for years and years? 
 What is so undeniably about it? If the allegations are to be believed, the so called anti-poaching agreement only prevented companies from actively recruiting each others employees. I can see how employees would want to be actively recruited. Yet, how is a company like Apple supposed to come out with great products if they keep losing employees working on complicated projects over pouching. Not only does Apple and other companies have to finish complicated projects by...
You are absolutely correct regarding the debt. It only makes sense Apple is one of the largest US taxpayers as it is one of the largest beneficiaries of our system.
  To be fair, Apple provided a more significant update to its iPad line up over this holiday season than last. I suspect lots of people jumped on iPads for the holiday. 
 I am not sure I buy it either. Moreover, even if it is true, small time investors mean more skittish people to sell at every little bit of percived negative further putting a drain on the stock. However, the truth is most stocks, or at least Apple, has traditionally took a significant up tick at the news of the split, so after the split the stock is traditionally higher than before the split was announced.  If you are a long turn investor, Apple is a great investment....
 He doesn't need hard evidence to have an opinion. Circumstansial evidence, or no evidence at all is fine. Being a lawyer myself, I can tell you it is law school 101 that a corporate officer owes a fiduciary duty to the company whose Board he or she sits on. Simply put, you can't do anything that goes against the interest of the company. Fact is Eric Schmitt resigned from Apple's Board in 2009, nearly two years after the iPhone came out. He was on Apple's Board a year...
 Getting around the limitation has nothing to do with Apple or illegal downloading.
New Posts  All Forums: