6 ms·

I believe you are right if... HP and Hurd wrote an agreement not to go to work for HP's competitors. Several companies do this, so they may very well have (in w

by nanairo 16y ago

I believe you are right if... HP and Hurd wrote an agreement not to go to work for HP's competitors. Several companies do this, so they may very well have (in which case Hurd is in a world of pain). On the other hand if they haven't, I am not sure what claim they can make.

kenjackson 16y ago
Actually they do NOT have a non-compete clause. He can work for competitors. He does have a confidentiality clause. Although I would have thought they'd need evidence that he breached it. I've worked with many ex-CxOs who have had similar clauses. And they are all very careful to not talk about past work experience. Maybe HP has a case, but it sure feels like they're kind of upset because they know Hurd is a pretty stellar CEO (all things considered), and it kind of sucks to lose him to a chief competitor.
- markstansbury 16y ago
  Hurd must have one hell of a lawyer if he negotiated that type of severance without any non-compete language. To that gentleman I say, well done sir. Well done. At any rate, I bet it will be difficult not to breach the confidentiality clause, though that really depends on how broad it is. The lawsuit is probably just designed to scare Hurd away from the job. Does he really want to risk that severance package for the freedom to resume working 7 days a week?
  - hga 16y ago
    This is California, non-competes presumptively evil there, although I had the impression his sort of job might be in the category where they are allowed.
- hga 16y ago
  The whole basis for allowing non-competes as a matter of public policy (in states other than California) is to prevent "the first bite of the apple", i.e. to prevent irreparable harm from the first use of an employee's knowledge of trade secrets. For most of us (e.g. hackers/programmers) that's generally not a big deal let alone legitimate, which might explain how Silicon Valley has done so well in an legal regime free of them (or as I argue, it's the most important factor in SV's success; it's certainly the only unique one). In this case, HP's claim that "he cannot perform his duties for Oracle without necessarily using and disclosing HP's trade secrets and confidential information to others" has a lot of merit. How could he possibly do his job, assuming it includes Sun systems stuff where HP directly competes, while compartmentalizing his very current knowledge of HP's legitimate trade secrets. E.g. knowledge of HPs major customers and their pain points, knowledge of how HP sees the market and what it is developing in response; heck, knowledge of how HP is planning on converting more Sun customers to HP. I loathe non-competes in general, but this sure looks like a legitimate exception to me.
  - kenjackson 16y ago
    How can you have irreperable harm in these sorts of business matters? No one is going to get killed or lose an arm. They can fix the issue with money.
    - hga 16y ago
      "Irreparable damage" as defined in my copy of The Plain-Language Law Dictionary" is "INJURY of such a nature that it is impossible to calculate its extent by an award of money". Here's my impressions as to how that can come about; they're not at all solid, I'm not even an amateur in this area, I've just read a lot of general business stuff: First of all, how can money recover the time and attention lost in litigating the issue? (A general problem, I grant you.) And then there's standard of and time lines for proof. Let's say I sue now, but whatever settlement I get doesn't prevent me from going out of business anyway a few years later. Both get to the next and defining problem: determining the proper amount of money to change hands. We can be sure the two sides will disagree ^_^. How does the damaged party prove that $X amount of damage to its future prospects has been made? They probably can't even be sure themselves. Even if they know it will put them out of business, how do they prove how much business they would have made without the injury???
      - kenjackson 16y ago
        But this seems like a problem with almost any civil suit. For example, a patent infringement has the exact same problems. Or slander, etc.... They all take time and attention for litigation. They all can have extended time where you don't get paid for years. And all have the same problems of determining damages now, and in the future. It just seems like an odd law that you could sue somebody who not only hasn't done anything yet, but has never had a past history that would lead one to believe that they might break the law. And its absurd for HP to say that its impossible for him to do his job at Oracle. It's very common for executives, with similar levels of knowledge to move from one company to a competitor. In fact, its almost always the case that they do go to a competitor.
rada 16y ago
From the court filing: Despite being paid millions of dollars in cash, stock and stock options in exchange for Hurd's agreements to protect HP's trade secrets and confidential informationfollowing his departure from his positions at HP as Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, and President, HP alleges that Hurd has put HP's most valuable trade secrets and confidential information in peril. ... and In his new positions, Hurd will be in a situation in which he cannot perform his duties for Oracle without necessarily using and disclosing HP's trade secrets and confidential information to others. ... and He was responsible for creating a plan to compete against HP competitors, including Oracle. ... and And independent analyst stated that Hurd will know "which Sun accounts were being most heavily mined and which HP accounts are the most vulnerable in the large enterprise space". ... and several others. Original complaints here: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/61873/HP%20Complaint%20w%20exhibits.pdf http://dl.dropbox.com/u/61873/HP%20Complaint%20w%20exhibits....

by nanairo 16y ago

kenjackson 16y ago

Actually they do NOT have a non-compete clause. He can work for competitors. He does have a confidentiality clause. Although I would have thought they'd need evidence that he breached it. I've worked with many ex-CxOs who have had similar clauses. And they are all very careful to not talk about past work experience. Maybe HP has a case, but it sure feels like they're kind of upset because they know Hurd is a pretty stellar CEO (all things considered), and it kind of sucks to lose him to a chief competitor.

markstansbury 16y ago
Hurd must have one hell of a lawyer if he negotiated that type of severance without any non-compete language. To that gentleman I say, well done sir. Well done. At any rate, I bet it will be difficult not to breach the confidentiality clause, though that really depends on how broad it is. The lawsuit is probably just designed to scare Hurd away from the job. Does he really want to risk that severance package for the freedom to resume working 7 days a week?
- hga 16y ago
  This is California, non-competes presumptively evil there, although I had the impression his sort of job might be in the category where they are allowed.
hga 16y ago
The whole basis for allowing non-competes as a matter of public policy (in states other than California) is to prevent "the first bite of the apple", i.e. to prevent irreparable harm from the first use of an employee's knowledge of trade secrets. For most of us (e.g. hackers/programmers) that's generally not a big deal let alone legitimate, which might explain how Silicon Valley has done so well in an legal regime free of them (or as I argue, it's the most important factor in SV's success; it's certainly the only unique one). In this case, HP's claim that "he cannot perform his duties for Oracle without necessarily using and disclosing HP's trade secrets and confidential information to others" has a lot of merit. How could he possibly do his job, assuming it includes Sun systems stuff where HP directly competes, while compartmentalizing his very current knowledge of HP's legitimate trade secrets. E.g. knowledge of HPs major customers and their pain points, knowledge of how HP sees the market and what it is developing in response; heck, knowledge of how HP is planning on converting more Sun customers to HP. I loathe non-competes in general, but this sure looks like a legitimate exception to me.
- kenjackson 16y ago
  How can you have irreperable harm in these sorts of business matters? No one is going to get killed or lose an arm. They can fix the issue with money.
  - hga 16y ago
    "Irreparable damage" as defined in my copy of The Plain-Language Law Dictionary" is "INJURY of such a nature that it is impossible to calculate its extent by an award of money". Here's my impressions as to how that can come about; they're not at all solid, I'm not even an amateur in this area, I've just read a lot of general business stuff: First of all, how can money recover the time and attention lost in litigating the issue? (A general problem, I grant you.) And then there's standard of and time lines for proof. Let's say I sue now, but whatever settlement I get doesn't prevent me from going out of business anyway a few years later. Both get to the next and defining problem: determining the proper amount of money to change hands. We can be sure the two sides will disagree ^_^. How does the damaged party prove that $X amount of damage to its future prospects has been made? They probably can't even be sure themselves. Even if they know it will put them out of business, how do they prove how much business they would have made without the injury???
    - kenjackson 16y ago
      But this seems like a problem with almost any civil suit. For example, a patent infringement has the exact same problems. Or slander, etc.... They all take time and attention for litigation. They all can have extended time where you don't get paid for years. And all have the same problems of determining damages now, and in the future. It just seems like an odd law that you could sue somebody who not only hasn't done anything yet, but has never had a past history that would lead one to believe that they might break the law. And its absurd for HP to say that its impossible for him to do his job at Oracle. It's very common for executives, with similar levels of knowledge to move from one company to a competitor. In fact, its almost always the case that they do go to a competitor.

rada 16y ago

From the court filing: Despite being paid millions of dollars in cash, stock and stock options in exchange for Hurd's agreements to protect HP's trade secrets and confidential informationfollowing his departure from his positions at HP as Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, and President, HP alleges that Hurd has put HP's most valuable trade secrets and confidential information in peril. ... and In his new positions, Hurd will be in a situation in which he cannot perform his duties for Oracle without necessarily using and disclosing HP's trade secrets and confidential information to others. ... and He was responsible for creating a plan to compete against HP competitors, including Oracle. ... and And independent analyst stated that Hurd will know "which Sun accounts were being most heavily mined and which HP accounts are the most vulnerable in the large enterprise space". ... and several others. Original complaints here: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/61873/HP%20Complaint%20w%20exhibits.pdf http://dl.dropbox.com/u/61873/HP%20Complaint%20w%20exhibits....