3 ms·

As far as I know there are no non-solicitation or non-compete agreements involved in this case at all. It all hinges on the fact that he was employed by Apple a

As far as I know there are no non-solicitation or non-compete agreements involved in this case at all. It all hinges on the fact that he was employed by Apple and owed them his undivided loyalty.

sillysaurusx 7y ago
Then I hope the case is thrown out. Companies have no loyalty to us. Why should we have loyalty to the company? Ah yes, because they have money and power. Sounds familiar. I think I get the argument – "how could society function if every employee were allowed to actively sabotage the company they worked for?" – I just don't buy it. Most people have no interest in doing such things. The law of large numbers seems to guarantee it won't be a big problem in practice. And I'm more in the "Let employees have civil liberties" camp than "Let companies protect themselves from any conceivable harm." And besides, we have a clear remedy for employees who sabotage their companies: fire them. From a cursory reading, it sounds like this person used his technical expertise to go start a startup, and tried to recruit some of his peers to leave their cushy bigco job and go help him. Y'know who else did that? Shockley Semiconductor.
- ratww 7y ago
  > Y'know who else did that? Shockley Semiconductor. Steve Jobs himself also recruited some folks from Apple when he left to found Next.
  - briandear 7y ago
    After he left. He didn't decide to start Next while at Apple using Apple resources with the intent to sell it back to Apple. That's a big difference.
    - ratww 7y ago
      Nope. "Over the previous six months, Jobs had kept in contact with some of the senior staff in the Macintosh division, even after Gassée took control. Five of these staffers agreed to become cofounders of the new company with Jobs. Chief among these were Bud Tribble, Susan Barnes, and Dan’l Lewin." [1] "After several months of being sidelined, Jobs resigned from Apple on September 13, 1985. He told the board he was leaving to set up a new computer company, and that he would be taking several Apple employees from the SuperMicro division with him." [2] He also intended on licensing the tech to Apple, according to those sources. [1] https://lowendmac.com/2013/next-years-steve-jobs-before-triumphant-return-apple/ https://lowendmac.com/2013/next-years-steve-jobs-before-triu... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT
      - ksec 7y ago
        Well I read this as more of an agreement to your OP rather than disagree. He told the board he was leaving to set up a new computer company, and that he would be taking several Apple employees from the SuperMicro division with him and He also intended on licensing the tech to Apple, according to those sources. i.e The board were both acknowledged and have a common interest.
gamblor956 7y ago
It all hinges on the fact that he was employed by Apple and owed them his undivided loyalty. Employees do not owe their employers their undivided loyalty. The lowest-level employees don't owe their employer anything when their shift ends. They're free to work for a competitor for the next 8 hours if they choose. Salaried employees generally don't owe their employer anything once they leave the office and stop work for the day...though only in a few states like CA are workers granted explicit protections for their extracurricular ventures. Only executives might owe undivided loyalty, and even then that is a provision of the employment contract that must be explicitly negotiated and paid for by the employer.
- ksec 7y ago
  >The lowest-level employees don't owe their employer anything when their shift ends. They're free to work for a competitor for the next 8 hours if they choose. May be in CA, but many part of the world this is not true. >Only executives might owe undivided loyalty, and even then that is a provision of the employment contract that must be explicitly negotiated and paid for by the employer. Which is exactly what is happening. He was only two or three level below Tim Cook.

As far as I know there are no non-solicitation or non-compete agreements involved in this case at all. It all hinges on the fact that he was employed by Apple and owed them his undivided loyalty.

sillysaurusx 7y ago

Then I hope the case is thrown out. Companies have no loyalty to us. Why should we have loyalty to the company? Ah yes, because they have money and power. Sounds familiar. I think I get the argument – "how could society function if every employee were allowed to actively sabotage the company they worked for?" – I just don't buy it. Most people have no interest in doing such things. The law of large numbers seems to guarantee it won't be a big problem in practice. And I'm more in the "Let employees have civil liberties" camp than "Let companies protect themselves from any conceivable harm." And besides, we have a clear remedy for employees who sabotage their companies: fire them. From a cursory reading, it sounds like this person used his technical expertise to go start a startup, and tried to recruit some of his peers to leave their cushy bigco job and go help him. Y'know who else did that? Shockley Semiconductor.

ratww 7y ago
> Y'know who else did that? Shockley Semiconductor. Steve Jobs himself also recruited some folks from Apple when he left to found Next.
- briandear 7y ago
  After he left. He didn't decide to start Next while at Apple using Apple resources with the intent to sell it back to Apple. That's a big difference.
  - ratww 7y ago
    Nope. "Over the previous six months, Jobs had kept in contact with some of the senior staff in the Macintosh division, even after Gassée took control. Five of these staffers agreed to become cofounders of the new company with Jobs. Chief among these were Bud Tribble, Susan Barnes, and Dan’l Lewin." [1] "After several months of being sidelined, Jobs resigned from Apple on September 13, 1985. He told the board he was leaving to set up a new computer company, and that he would be taking several Apple employees from the SuperMicro division with him." [2] He also intended on licensing the tech to Apple, according to those sources. [1] https://lowendmac.com/2013/next-years-steve-jobs-before-triumphant-return-apple/ https://lowendmac.com/2013/next-years-steve-jobs-before-triu... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT
    - ksec 7y ago
      Well I read this as more of an agreement to your OP rather than disagree. He told the board he was leaving to set up a new computer company, and that he would be taking several Apple employees from the SuperMicro division with him and He also intended on licensing the tech to Apple, according to those sources. i.e The board were both acknowledged and have a common interest.

gamblor956 7y ago

It all hinges on the fact that he was employed by Apple and owed them his undivided loyalty. Employees do not owe their employers their undivided loyalty. The lowest-level employees don't owe their employer anything when their shift ends. They're free to work for a competitor for the next 8 hours if they choose. Salaried employees generally don't owe their employer anything once they leave the office and stop work for the day...though only in a few states like CA are workers granted explicit protections for their extracurricular ventures. Only executives might owe undivided loyalty, and even then that is a provision of the employment contract that must be explicitly negotiated and paid for by the employer.

ksec 7y ago
>The lowest-level employees don't owe their employer anything when their shift ends. They're free to work for a competitor for the next 8 hours if they choose. May be in CA, but many part of the world this is not true. >Only executives might owe undivided loyalty, and even then that is a provision of the employment contract that must be explicitly negotiated and paid for by the employer. Which is exactly what is happening. He was only two or three level below Tim Cook.