Judge orders ex-IBM exec, new Apple VP to stop working for Apple

[snoopy369]

Strictly speaking, the judge basically granted a preliminary injunction here - he didn't rule in IBM's favor. He just agreed that IBM might have a prima facie case, and so he didn't allow the defendant to work for Apple until this is resolved.

[Asher]

Originally posted by -Jrabbit
He spent 26 years with the same firm. He stalled himself.

If he's such a hotshot, he could do something really productive with that year.

But the non-compete prevents him from doing anything productive in his field for that year.

BTW, I don't know if he stalled himself by staying with IBM. He's clearly highly successful, and perhaps one of the most sought-after positions in the tech industry fell in his lap.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by -Jrabbit
It's like signing a pre-nup. But when you get married, there's at least the promise of fidelity and loyalty (whether that's how it works out or not). In business, they can "re-org" you out of existence without a second thought.

Employer actions can void the non-compete.

I have a 1 year non-compete as well.

[chequita guevara]

As Asher states, these things are standard in the industry. I'm asked to sign one at every place I go. The last place I worked had such a broad non-compete that I told them I wouldn't take the job until it was fixed. It basically prevented me from working on websites. What the hell were they thinking? Anyway, got that fixed.

[snoopy369]

I'd have been tempted to sign the non-compete, and then assume it would get thrown out for being illegally broad (i'd 'assume' this after receiving legal advice, of course)...