Update: judge orders Apple's new mobile head to stop work

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 74
    Boo to IBM, if Papermaster did breach the contract then sue him, else don't. Besides, the current iPod and iTouch doesn't use PPC architecture, why is IBM so worried, it will take Apple a couple of years to develop its own processor and architecture for iPod and iTouch.
  • Reply 42 of 74
    synpsynp Posts: 248member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ouragan View Post


    Apple would have you believe that breaking a non-competition agreement does not carry any consequence whatsoever. If the law was like that, why would anyone enter into such an agreement and pay good money for it?



    That's not what Apple is claiming. I'm sure his new contract has a similar clause. They are claiming that in his new position, he is not competing with IBM, so he's not violating the clause. If non-competes said that you couldn't work anywhere in the technology sector for a year, I think more courts would rule them non-enforceable.



    Quote:

    The non-competition agreement is valid for one year only and was signed in return for the salary, bonus, stock options, health insurance, pension, severance payment equal to one year of salary, and other valid considerations paid by IBM to its employee.



    A claim could be made that all jobs at this level carry with them a non-compete clause, so unless he wanted to get a low-level job, he really had to sign the non-compete and didn't have a choice. I'm sure a lawyer can make this claim, but I don't think it will stand.



    Quote:

    Exclusive jurisdiction is given to the Court of the County of Westchester, State of New York. The law of California and the Courts of California have no jurisdiction over this matter.



    The non-competition agreement is standard and reasonable because its duration is limited to one year and the employee is paid a salary or other compensation by IBM for the whole duration of the period of non-competition.



    I think he's not paid specifically for that year. The idea is that IBM had to pay him more (in his regular salary) for him to agree to sign a contract that has this clause. Either way, that is why such a contract is usually accepted.



    When companies tried to enforce such a clause on all levels or R&D, or to make it cover a too broad definition of "compete", such agreements were thrown out by the courts.



    Quote:

    The intertlocutory injunction will stand.







    I believe that is correct.
  • Reply 43 of 74
    synpsynp Posts: 248member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zinfella View Post


    Some non-competes are of a longer duration. When Lucky Stores in Arizona were sold to ABCO, there was a 5 year non-compete clause in place for Lucky not to compete in Arizona.



    Sure, but that is different. Corporations may sign away many more "rights" than individuals can. A corporation might even be able to promise non-competition forever.
  • Reply 44 of 74
    synpsynp Posts: 248member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Inverse137 View Post


    Dueces, because idiot lawyers told the buisness' owners that non-compete contracts were enforceable.



    Looks like the idiot lawyers were right



    Quote:

    Most people sign them with a wink-wink-nod-nod reluctance. Most states don't recognize them because the consequence of recognizing a non-compete clause is to deprive a person of the right to make a living. That FUNDAMENTAL right is guaranteed to you by the U.S. Constitution.



    Fundamental, yes, but is depriving you from working for a competitor for 1 year bad enough to be a breach of your rights? It's just one year. If so, how about the clause in many job contracts that you can't have any other job at the same time as this job? Is that also infringing on your fundamental rights?



    Quote:

    Although, by your post, I'm guessing you are a fan of George Jr. and see the Constitution more as a guideline that can be ignored when it suits your needs.



    The only legal leg IBM has is defending the patents it holds if they were ever infringed upon. They have no prayer of keeping this dude from working.



    Apparently, they have.
  • Reply 45 of 74
    synpsynp Posts: 248member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TheMadMilkman View Post


    You act like it's already been determined that his work at Apple violates the non-compete agreement. I'd like to know how you can be so sure on an issue of fact like that before the trial occurs.



    Trial? What trial? There's never going to be any trial.



    With two companies the size of Apple and IBM, by the time they get through discovery and pre-trial motions and mandatory arbitration and what-not, the 1 year period will be over and Mr. Papermaster will be able to work for Apple at whatever job.



    At best we're going to have a hearing with Apple asking to lift the order.
  • Reply 46 of 74
    ivladivlad Posts: 740member
    weelll that totallyyy sucks. =(
  • Reply 47 of 74
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,230moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post


    Despite the claims that IBM is not in the consumer electronics space, it's processors are in the PS3, Xbox and Wii.



    I wonder what Apple will eventually use in their Apple TV device. They surely can't keep the Toasty Pentium:



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Cf3m_YUzCM



    I guess in some way the Apple TV competes with the consoles. The primary function isn't gaming though. Although the consoles have media center functionality, it is not their main selling point. If the Apple TV moved up to gaming then maybe but I reckon they'd stick to lower powered ARM again.



    As an aside, here are some other ads I found. I don't think I've seen the Mr Bean one before:



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA1XPTsUGDo

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jge_X5joVtc

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HhncO6w4Pc
  • Reply 48 of 74
    For comedy value, Apple should tell IBM they were going to offer him a salary of say....US$40,000,000 per year, but that if IBM themselves are willing to pay that to stop him working at Apple, they can have him sit at home in front of Judge Judy instead.
  • Reply 49 of 74
    pxtpxt Posts: 683member
    Papermaster should have gone to Pixar for a year. Special advisor to Steve Jobs.
  • Reply 50 of 74
    hosshoss Posts: 69member
    Let this be a lesson for everyone. If you decide one day all willy-nilly to go work for IBM, make sure your contract lists you as a "weekend janitor".
  • Reply 51 of 74
    kolchakkolchak Posts: 1,398member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trevorlsciact View Post


    why is it that contracts like this are legal?! this is just one step away from indentured servitude



    Oh, please. Anytime somebody brings that up, it makes him look silly. You're rolling eyes without fully understanding the situation.



    Papermaster can leave IBM. He can work. He just can't do anything similar to what he used to do for a period of one year. Since companies like IBM depend heavily on intellectual property, it's fair for them to do what they can to protect that IP. In a year, most of what he knew about IBM's plans and R&D will be obsolete and he can do whatever he wants for Apple. In the meantime, he has plenty of spare time to keep up with what other companies are doing in the field, so he can be up to speed immediately when he does start work for Apple. He's getting paid. He's not taking unemployment or welfare, on the verge of foreclosure or otherwise in dire financial straits. So just let it go.
  • Reply 52 of 74
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Cringely wrote about this a couple days ago. I agree with his assesment that Apple will probably agree to buy product from IBM to make this go away if it's holding Apple back. I also agree that Papermaster's officel new title has nothing to do what he was hired for.



    PS: I tried to post the link, but without copy/paste I had to type if out, which meant going back and forth between mobileSafari windows, which meant a crash. If you read his article, note their are two, one is text and the other is audio. It seems to be confusing some readers.
  • Reply 53 of 74
    rayzrayz Posts: 814member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kolchak View Post


    Oh, please. Anytime somebody brings that up, it makes him look silly. You're rolling eyes without fully understanding the situation.



    Papermaster can leave IBM. He can work. He just can't do anything similar to what he used to do for a period of one year. Since companies like IBM depend heavily on intellectual property, it's fair for them to do what they can to protect that IP. In a year, most of what he knew about IBM's plans and R&D will be obsolete and he can do whatever he wants for Apple. In the meantime, he has plenty of spare time to keep up with what other companies are doing in the field, so he can be up to speed immediately when he does start work for Apple. He's getting paid. He's not taking unemployment or welfare, on the verge of foreclosure or otherwise in dire financial straits. So just let it go.



    Up until a month ago, Apple prevented iPhone developers from talking to each other in order to protect their intellectual property; I would have thought the Mac community would be a little more understanding of IBM's position.
  • Reply 54 of 74
    matt_smatt_s Posts: 299member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aplnub View Post


    I doubt anyone held a gun to Papermaster's head when he signed the contract. So the better question is, why do people sign these things?



    Ah, a voice of reason. IBM has a policy to protect the company's shareholders from losing value when a key employee is given the keys to the kingdom, the recipe for the secret sauce.



    It is that employee's decision whether or not to place his or her signature on that contract and in effect, agree with IBM's policy.



    Papermaster could have just as easily said, "thanks but no thanks," and walked away. But he didn't.



    And kudos to Apple for working so hard to uphold their legal mumbo-jumbo policy vs Pystar while they work so hard to disassemble IBM's. Corporate America. It's all about who you're sleeping with at the time, eh?
  • Reply 55 of 74
    I can understand if an employer is allowed to sue you if you leak confidential information about the company while you're working for them or states you can't work for a competitor while you're still employed. Though for the court system to be used to force you to stay with only one employer for the rest of your life should be considered slavery and the American legal system should be ashamed of they way they handled this case. I would be pissed if I was this guy being told he only has the option of being unemployed or working for IBM for the rest of his life. Whatever happened to building your on the job skills and taking those skills somewhere else due to needing to relocate for a move or wanting to increase your salary when your employer is unable or unwilling to meet your needs?
  • Reply 56 of 74
    hosshoss Posts: 69member
    Don't be surprised if that big shot lawyer Apple hired last year is luring IBM into an intellectual property rights dispute that Apple would happily lose in a higher court. Then for the next ten years Apple can hide behind the court's decision when they spring the really good stuff. Brilliant!!!!!



    Apple's approach to this snatch and grab from IBM seems to careless to be believable.
  • Reply 57 of 74
    I would doubt that there is a single Fortune 500 company that doesn't have their management, especially those in R&D, Market/Planning and Financance/New Product Development contracted without a non-compete clause.



    Certainly, shareholders in particular would be highly hesitant knowing that top R&D personnel could simply walk out the door and go across the street to the competition at a drop of the hat.



    Heck, "Non-compete clauses are everywhere from restaurants and their chefs to basketball teams and their coaches."* Probably the biggest corporations that are very tight on NCC and NDA are those that do contract work for the Federal Government, especially defence contractors. And even the Feds themselves have a similar and even more binding agreements which are virtually holding for the rest of one's life.



    What IBM is doing here is simply ensuring that its (company and shareholders) property rights are being protected. Papermaster got an offer he couldn't or didn't want to refuse. Apple did nothing wrong by offering the position. Surely Apple understands and agrees to the principle of NCC's as they themselves employ their use. As such, Papermaster's employment from IBM to Apple would be conditional. However, it should be noted that Papermaster may have forgotten his commitment (as it was a long time ago) or his understanding of it did not appear to conflict with the position he was being hired for. In either case, it was simply decided to let the ball fall were it may, and if need be, let the courts decide it a foul was committed.



    For those who are in the position to have to sign a NCC, the rewards for doing so virtually keeps them out of the poor house. This does not fall in the realm of servitude or "you can't keep me from enjoying a livelihood." However, the treatment of such depends on where you are, the conditions it covered and the intent to which the move is being made in the first place.



    Here is a good site to help explain Non Competition Agreements.†



    "We have all heard urban myths - crocodiles attacking people in sewers; Jimmy Hoffa buried under Giants' Stadium in New Jersey. They sound real, but they are not. The distribution industry has such an urban myth. The myth is that non-compete clauses in manufacturers' representatives' contracts can be ignored because they do not mean anything. That statement is false. In almost every state, a tightly drawn non-competition agreement will be enforced by the courts. Even if the non-compete requirements are overly broad, the courts in many states will narrow them in order to enforce what the court feels is proper."



    Perhaps this free article "Protect Trade Secrets from a Corporate Raid" will help to a better understanding. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...s_/ai_59579692



    In any event, just wish that you get to be so presented with the opportunity. It can be a great negotiating tool. If they want you bad enough to consider your position that valuable, it obviously can raise the bar on all sides.



    Another thing to consider. If you decide to dishonour your NCC, particularly if you were skipping to a major competitor and lied about it, just wonder how many companies would want to take a chance and hire you after that.



    *http://virginianoncompete.blogspot.c...of-sports.html



    http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...g=content;col1
  • Reply 58 of 74
    sennensennen Posts: 1,466member
    Turner and Bobby Newmark will get it sorted.
  • Reply 59 of 74
    kolchakkolchak Posts: 1,398member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Imagine Engine View Post


    Though for the court system to be used to force you to stay with only one employer for the rest of your life should be considered slavery and the American legal system should be ashamed of they way they handled this case. I would be pissed if I was this guy being told he only has the option of being unemployed or working for IBM for the rest of his life.



    Read the agreement. Or read the replies here. ONE YEAR. Okay? Not the rest of his life. And he's not unemployable. If Apple, Intel, AMD, Dell or whoever wants to put him in charge of anything but microprocessor design, he's free to take it right now.
  • Reply 60 of 74
    I don't believe this is about IP at all. IBM arrogantly believed they had this guy, an elite member of the management team, for life. They took him for granted and were stunned and embarrassed when he resigned. They didn't know how to respond and even let him stay with unrestricted access for two weeks. They had stuck him with blade servers and this guy needs a challenge--he was ripe for the picking. IBM dropped the ball. Jobs showed him some things and issued the necessary challenge. They offered him a years salary to honor the one year term and he slapped them in the face and said NO. This is retaliation, vindictiveness and CYA. Maybe Steve Jobs greatest genius is recognizing talent-- Jony Ive, Ron Johnson, Tim Cook, those at Pixar et al. He gets the best people on his team. This all makes me think IBM is afraid of Apple.
Sign In or Register to comment.