Apple recruits top chip designer, IBM responds with suit

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 95
    slewisslewis Posts: 2,080member
    Null.
  • Reply 22 of 95
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    The point to non competes is that it's impossible for someone to not use something confidential used in their work at the previous company.



    You would have to blank out some of your knowledge. That's just not possible. Everything you learn, and everything you come up with yourself, becomes part of your overall Gestalt.



    Separating that out just can't be done. And after all, that's why a person is being hired away in the first place, because of their experience, knowledge, expertise, and quality. How do you take some of that and say, "Ok, I won't use it." They can't.



    That's why there is a period of non compete. That gives their knowledge time to obsolete to the point where it won't be as much of a problem..
  • Reply 23 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post


    It certainly is ridiculous. It's why the world is so fucked up today. Everything is about money and, consequently, competition.



    People say that competition is what drives better products and accelerates technological evolution. This is *completely* false!!!



    Competition and money absolutely slows down technological evolution. IBM will do everything to stop the knowledge from spreading outside its boundaries because it'll lose its competitive edge which would then translate into a loss of money. If competition and money were never an issue, knowledge would spread rapidly and evolution would happen quickly.



    Possibly the most blatant example of slow evolution is the plague that is oil companies that are turning in record profits right now. Oil companies have always slowed down alternative energy inventions by buying rights and sitting on the technology or outright clandestinely sending thugs to kill the inventors that did not accept their offer they couldn't (read shouldn't) refuse.



    Well done, I couldn't have said it better myself.
  • Reply 24 of 95
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,213moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    IBM has issued a statement saying "Mr. Papermaster's employment by Apple is a violation of his agreement with IBM against working for a competitor should he leave IBM. We will vigorously pursue this case in court."



    That's a bit of a harsh agreement. Surely they would be required to compensate for the lack of work. You can't just force someone to never be able to work in the job they've been qualified for years in. All you can do is protect your own IP if it ever gets used.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Papermaster is the author of a number of papers



    Makes sense really.



    The name reminds me of the Puppet Master from Ghost in the Shell:



    "We in Section 6 have been pursuing the [Paper] Master with the utmost urgency since he first appeared."

    "lf you can't recover him, l want the [Paper] Master destroyed.

    Without fail."

    "But why did the [Paper] Master run over to Section 9?

    lt was his decision.

    Probably for reasons we can't even guess at.

    Perhaps he has a thing for someone over there."

    "Now suppose, for some reason, they suddenly lost control of it.

    That would explain why they'd risk assaulting Section 9 to get it back.

    lf the [Paper] Master started talking

    it'd be an international incident."



    Throw the hammer at Section 6 again Apple. They cannot have control over the Paper Master.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    IBM's complaint says "the relationship between Apple and IBM will become even more competitive in the future." It notes Apple's acquisition of PA Semi, and states that "IBM and PA Semi have been competitors since at least 2006, when Apple, then a customer of IBM, considered replacing IBM's PowerPC microprocessors, which Apple used to incorporate in its line of personal computers, with microprocessors designed by PA Semi."



    I don't see how IBM and Apple are competitors given that Apple don't make processors. With iphone they use ARM, in their computers and servers, they use Intel. They don't compete in the high end server space so there's very little ground they compete on.
  • Reply 25 of 95
    I hope Apple defends this by throwing the book (er ah, I mean hammer) at them. I would argue that you can't sign away your right to work. It's a restriction of trade. Anyway, if Apple wants him enough, they'll find ways to keep him gainfully employed until his 12 months restriction of trade clause is up. To me, its all quite simple. Apple wants a super low power consuming chip for its mobile devices ( announced or under development). There is no conflict of interest here, for if IBM had such a chip, Apple would simply buy/license it. No, Apple knows what it wants, nobody else is in that space, so Apple has enough cash to go and do it themselves. More power to them I say.



    Pete
  • Reply 26 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kolchak View Post


    No, it doesn't. Read the agreement. It has the standard clause limiting it to one year after he leaves the company. He's free to legally work for whomever he wants to after that year is up.



    So what's he meant to do, go on benefits for a year and hope the Apple job is still available once his former employers have deemed he can apply his expertise and knowledge in microprocessor design for someone other than IBM?



    I didn't realise the year cool off piece was in the contract, but that just makes it more stupid. WHat's he meant to have done after a year, forgotten all his knowledge? Unlikely.
  • Reply 27 of 95
    Quote:

    I take it you mean the iPhone 3rd Gen?



    Haha, that too



    Quote:

    So what's he meant to do, go on benefits for a year and hope the Apple job is still available once his former employers have deemed he can apply his expertise and knowledge in microprocessor design for someone other than IBM?



    You got a point though. Yeah, I doubt he will forget all those years of work Unless IBM brainwashed him, LOL
  • Reply 28 of 95
    kolchakkolchak Posts: 1,398member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by columbus View Post


    So what's he meant to do, go on benefits for a year and hope the Apple job is still available once his former employers have deemed he can apply his expertise and knowledge in microprocessor design for someone other than IBM?



    I didn't realise the year cool off piece was in the contract, but that just makes it more stupid. WHat's he meant to have done after a year, forgotten all his knowledge? Unlikely.



    NC agreements almost always have one-year durations. You're trying reductio ad absurdum unsuccessfully. He can get any other kind of job he's qualified for. The agreement only prohibits him from doing essentially the same work he did for IBM. After the year is up, he's free to do the same work but it will be safer for IBM by that time because he no longer has knowledge of their most current research or upcoming designs.
  • Reply 29 of 95
    Actually, I'm sure they considered the possibility and have a legal defense prepared. It's a civil suit. All IBM can get is money, and I'd guess they will get some. They can't actually make Paperclip do anything if Apple will pay for any legal problems.



    Apple decided that Paperclip is worth it. I hope he is.
  • Reply 30 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post


    Possibly the most blatant example of slow evolution is the plague that is oil companies that are turning in record profits right now. Oil companies have always slowed down alternative energy inventions ...........



    there is a lot of truth in the above statement (not sure about the remaining part which I edited out), but also consider the role of politicians who stifle research and investment for their own petty political survival, but I digress.



    Reading the article, I wonder how these things work out in America. I mean here we have two blue chip companies, one of them (Apple) poached a senior manager from the other (IBM) with the clear intention to tap in the inside knowledge and experience. At this level all top managers are required to sign confidentiality agreements. It'd been expected for IBM to put up a legal fight. I'm sure Appple's legal department must have looked into Papermaster's contract and decided it was a risk worth taking on. He (Papermaster) must have done the same with his own lawyers. However there is a risk involved in these litigation. Where I'm getting at, has Papermaster reached an agreement with Apple along these lines: "ok, if IBM fight the case, we all believe we have a good cause but in the worst case scenario, you Apple either pay IBM a fine to free me up or if I'm impeded to join then you give me a golden handshake as I cannot go back to IBM and will be therefore unemployed"
  • Reply 31 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post


    It certainly is ridiculous. It's why the world is so fucked up today. Everything is about money and, consequently, competition.



    People say that competition is what drives better products and accelerates technological evolution. This is *completely* false!!!



    Competition and money absolutely slows down technological evolution. IBM will do everything to stop the knowledge from spreading outside its boundaries because it'll lose its competitive edge which would then translate into a loss of money. If competition and money were never an issue, knowledge would spread rapidly and evolution would happen quickly.



    Possibly the most blatant example of slow evolution is the plague that is oil companies that are turning in record profits right now. Oil companies have always slowed down alternative energy inventions by buying rights and sitting on the technology or outright clandestinely sending thugs to kill the inventors that did not accept their offer they couldn't (read shouldn't) refuse.



    What a load of BS!



    What do you think keeps Apple innovating?... competition! Without it there would be near zero growth in civilian tech sector... as an example, see the Soviet Union! They had world class technology for a long time... except that it never made it to their civilian sector! no money, no competition, no goods!



    We live in the most capitalist country on the planet, ever wonder why we have a greater share of the entrepreneurs & innovation? Money and competition! Without competition technology stagnates! Look at windows for another example. No one has ever said windows is the best OS but after MS killed the competition... stagnation with ouly minor fixes and eye-candy updates!



    This is why Linux will always be pulling up the rear in technology! There is no money in developing/innovating for Linux directly. That will be done in the proprietary world then Linux will open source the technology at a later time! Like all absolutes there are some exceptions but they are extremely rare!



    Your oil company example actually kills your own case... They kill the competition so the technology stagnates. This is why monopolies are bad, no COMPETITION!



    KRR
  • Reply 32 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post




    Possibly the most blatant example of slow evolution is the plague that is oil companies that are turning in record profits right now. Oil companies have always slowed down alternative energy inventions by buying rights and sitting on the technology or outright clandestinely sending thugs to kill the inventors that did not accept their offer they couldn't (read shouldn't) refuse.





    Hey! I have to respond to your line about oil companies.... as I work for one.

    1. if you don't want oil, don't use it (you will have no cars, no shoes, no clothes, no almost anything). stop blaming oil companies for the sluts and greedy people we are.

    2. are they turning in record profits? goooood. why nobody asked any of the banks and brokers who turned in record profits last year, or the year before, or two years ago? just look at the top 10 money makers in the last 3 years and you will see 1 oil company in and the rest are banks (bank of am, citigroup, etc.) what did these banks do? got us in the economic mess we are in right now, used (and still using) outrages fees, interest, and business practices to rip people off, move the pile of money from NY to LA to Jakarta and Hong Kong, and get more money out of it at the end of the day. I think Americans need to understand that you need to produce something, and of good quality, in order to make money. That means computers like apple, cars like the Japanese cars, nuclear reactors like the Canadian ones, etc. The DotCom crashed because they were selling puff pastry into thin air. The housing boom crashed because of speculants and greedy brokers who ripped off prople.

    3. you want alternative energy? I want that too. I live in the great state of tx (because of work and not choice). I would put a solar roof but my incentives are so minimal that i do not want to spend 40k that I will maybe recoup in 30 years. i wanted to bring a small car (diesel) from europe (that has about 60miles/gal and it is much cleaner than my honda ULEV). but, sorry, can't do that because of the american protectionism toward their fat piggy cars.

    4. and give me a break with oil compnies sending people to wack inventors because they did not want to sell their stuff to the oil companies. the fact of the matter is that alternative en are too expensive compared to fossil fuels and it will take time to replace the infrastructure you have in place right now. The $140/baril was the best thing that happened for alt. en. It made it more competitive with fossil fuels, people started conserving energy, and the big ugly SUV were out ofthe market.
  • Reply 33 of 95
    boogabooga Posts: 1,077member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BuffyzDead View Post


    Based on a thorough reading of both documents, Papermaster will just HAVE TO chill, until a year from now.



    It means PA Semi/Apple will need to do without Papermaster's expertise, for the next 12 months.



    Either it delays Apple's chip design; takes Apple's chip design in a potentially different direction than if Papermaster were involved; OR demonstrates that Apple's engineers were able to accomplish the same or better, without Papermaster.



    At any rate, it's all a moot point now that IBM has gone All Legal.



    At the rate those lawsuits get strung out, it will be a year from now before you know it, and things will play out.



    I meant to title this:

    Legally Papermaster will have to chill until Oct 25, 2009, not 08



    I read the non-compete clause, too, and I'm not sure I agree. There seems to be a rather obvious hole in IBM's legal assertion: The fact that none of Apple's and IBM's products actually compete with each other in any market.



    IBM has no mobile handset. IBM has no MP3 player. IBM does not make consumer computers anymore.



    Apple does not sell chip fab or design services. Apple doesn't buy, sell, or trade in IBM's chip architecture or any products made from it.



    Basically, unless IBM is going to assert that this man is not allowed to practice his craft AT ALL for a year after leaving, Papermaster couldn't have picked a company IBM competes LESS with than Apple. From how it looks to me, Papermaster made every attempt to choose a company that honored his non-compete, and I see a judge as likely to throw IBM out on its butt with prejudice.



    I'm not a lawyer.
  • Reply 34 of 95
    So - IBM offered the guy an extra year's salary. Couldn't Apple do the same thing a year from now? What would stop Papermaster from volunteering at Apple for a year, then getting a double paycheck the next year?
  • Reply 35 of 95
    vinney57vinney57 Posts: 1,162member
    One year non-competes are standard practise. In the UK its called 'gardening leave' (ie you go and tend your garden for a year). The contention will be whether IIBM and Apple are competing in the specific area he is joining. Its clear that Apple's lawyers believe there's no conflict. Worst case he'll have to spend the year moving his family to Cali and decorate the house, taking 20 calls a day from Steve on his 'secure' iPhone.



    Seriously, who could resist working with Steve on some new R&D project with unlimited funds?
  • Reply 36 of 95
    leonardleonard Posts: 528member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    I don't see how IBM and Apple are competitors given that Apple don't make processors. With iphone they use ARM, in their computers and servers, they use Intel. They don't compete in the high end server space so there's very little ground they compete on.



    You haven't been keeping up on the Apple rumors. Rumor has it that Apple is looking at creating it's own low power processor (likely PowerPC) for mobile or consumer electronic devices... maybe the iPhone or iPod Touch or some new device. The reason it bought all those P.A. Semi employees.
  • Reply 37 of 95
    Seems reasonable. Nothing nefarious here, on either party.



    IBM just wants to protect its intellectual property and has their employees agree to an NDA that excludes them to go to the 'other' side for a period of 12 months.



    Like all major corporations, it is a standard business practice and I know for sure that Apple has equal conditions placed on its staff, particularly at the level discussed.



    Could you imagine how you would feel if you were an investor and found out that such conditions were not in place? Without such, a investment could be destroyed overnight it its trade secrets were perceived as being compromised.



    And please keep in mind that the concerns are not as simple as just protecting a product line. In this case, Papermaster's move particularly re his involvement at his level in the current and near future strategic, manufacturing, marketing and sales plans would be equally disconcerting.



    For a better understanding What is Intellectual Property" and "Why Protecting Intellectual Property Rights Matters": http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/intelprp/
  • Reply 38 of 95
    boogabooga Posts: 1,077member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Leonard View Post


    You haven't been keeping up on the Apple rumors. Rumor has it that Apple is looking at creating it's own low power processor (likely PowerPC) for mobile or consumer electronic devices... maybe the iPhone or iPod Touch or some new device. The reason it bought all those P.A. Semi employees.



    As long as they just use their own processors in their own devices, they're still NOT COMPETING in any market.



    Besides, Apple's not an idiot company-- why on Earth would they take the step backwards from ARM to PowerPC? My guess is they'd design an ARM core for use solely in their own products. (Products which IBM doesn't make and therefore DOESN'T COMPETE with.)
  • Reply 39 of 95
    I think IBM's NC is flawed.



    In paragraph 2, sub.d, it make a statement that the "restricted area" is defined as any geographical area in the world where you had job responsibilities..."



    My lawyers have always said basically, "you can't keep someone from making a living".



    Including the whole world should get tossed in court if it ever made it that far. I am surprised that this language is in an IBM document. Maybe they just haven't been tested in court...
  • Reply 40 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    IBM believes this is "an attempt to expand Apple's presence in the markets for servers and chips for handheld devices."



    Apple has issued a statement saying "No sh!t"
Sign In or Register to comment.