3 ms·

I think the argument is more that Hurd is in a decision-making and strategy forming position. He is privy to all the inside information that HP has to date, and

I think the argument is more that Hurd is in a decision-making and strategy forming position. He is privy to all the inside information that HP has to date, and as such, he is in a unique position to make decisions that can do serious damage to HP. As an co-president of Oracle, he has a duty to make decisions that benefit Oracle, as ex-CEO of HP (and with a non-compete), he has an obligation to not make decisions based on information he attained during his tenure that would harm HP. This is a decisive and likely unresolvable conflict of interest. What is most interesting is the politics of it all. Oracle's CEO (Ellison) is a friend of both Mark Hurd and Steve Jobs. What if this farce is designed to undermine HP's foray into the tablet space with WebOS, which may compete with Apple? There is probably a lot of scheming beneath the surface. Any conspiracy theories? I love conspiracies.

brownleej 16y ago
I'd have to see the text of Hurd's agreement to be sure, but if it is a confidentiality agreement, it might not prevent him from making decisions based on the inside information he had. My assumption when I see "confidentiality agreement" is that he is only forbidden from disclosing the information to someone else. He could, theoretically, do his job at Oracle without telling anyone anything about HP's plans. You also mention the non-compete provision, but the article seems to imply that his agreement with HP didn't include a non-compete provision.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  If he makes decisions based on his confidential information and those decisions can be observed by a third party he is, in effect, revealing that information.
- po 16y ago
  You're right. Non-compete agreements are not allowed in California. We definitely wont be able to know until we see what the confidentiality agreement was.

3 ms·

I think the argument is more that Hurd is in a decision-making and strategy forming position. He is privy to all the inside information that HP has to date, and

by kenthorvath 16y ago

brownleej 16y ago
I'd have to see the text of Hurd's agreement to be sure, but if it is a confidentiality agreement, it might not prevent him from making decisions based on the inside information he had. My assumption when I see "confidentiality agreement" is that he is only forbidden from disclosing the information to someone else. He could, theoretically, do his job at Oracle without telling anyone anything about HP's plans. You also mention the non-compete provision, but the article seems to imply that his agreement with HP didn't include a non-compete provision.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  If he makes decisions based on his confidential information and those decisions can be observed by a third party he is, in effect, revealing that information.
- po 16y ago
  You're right. Non-compete agreements are not allowed in California. We definitely wont be able to know until we see what the confidentiality agreement was.