According to court documents recently unsealed, the judge presiding over the IBM versus Papermaster lawsuit banned the latter party from working at Apple because he felt it would result in irreparable damage for IBM.
The judge is an idiot. How can a judge in New York assert jurisdiction over some who worked in Texas and now in California. You have to sue the person in their home state . Both Texas and California refuse to uphold non compete clauses .
The lawsuit is in Federal District Court, not state court. That is the proper court in a dispute such as this with a corporation based in New York, an employee working for the corporation in Texas and another company headquartered in California.
Besides, this ruling only applies to the temporary order preventing papermaster from working at Apple. It is not the final outcome in this case. Believe it or not this is just a contract dispute. Often times courts will uphold the temporary injuctions until the matter at the heart of the issue is sorted out. Maybe better than letting him work for 3 months then having a ruling that he is actually in violation and forcing him to leave for two years.
The owners in this country want to own you: your labor, your body, and your mind. It is ludicrous that people put up with these non-compete agreements. If we all agreed together not to sign them the corporate world would be SOL.
[citation][nom]Bob F[/nom]The owners in this country want to own you: your labor, your body, and your mind. It is ludicrous that people put up with these non-compete agreements. If we all agreed together not to sign them the corporate world would be SOL.United we stand, divided we fall.[/citation]
It's not just corporations either. Colleges, institutions setup to develop young minds into focused tools, assert the same control over their students. Anything created by a student belongs to the school. When you have to come up with that killer thesis project, don't over-do it, you still want something you can work on/market after you graduate.
These organizations promote and encourage new thinking and development of new ideas, then punish the individual when those ideas take them in a direction that dissagrees with the coporation (i.e. obviously Papermaster had a reason to leave IBM).
Papermaster may have enough in savings to live without working for a year, but how would most people survive, get a job in a completely unrelated field, while their skills degrade after a year of disuse? Sure, Papermaster shouldn't get to use IBM blue-prints or anything, but to say his experience is a threat is obsurd. Experience is all any employee ever has to market themselves.
crosshairs: noncompetition agreements start their clock from the date of termination, not from the date you sign the agreement (i.e. IBM says "If you leave this company, you can't work for our competitor for a year."