18 ms·
Amazon sues former AWS marketing VP Brian Hall after he takes Google Cloud job
- sg47 6y ago"One of those Amazon HR executives, Paz Patel, responded with this message, according to Hall’s filing: “Congratulations, I had a feeling that you would land there. Very happy to hear this news.” Would be surprised if Paz Patel is still employed at Amazon.
- QuinnyPig 6y agoI'm not so sure. That's not quite AWS's brand of "needlessly vindictive." They aim that in other directions mostly...
- swyx 6y agoi'm honestly just curious about the legal strategy at this point. Has Amazon won any of these suits?
- txcwpalpha 6y agoFrom the article: > Amazon similarly sued Philip Moyer, a former Amazon Web Services sales executive, after he took a job with Google Cloud last year. A judge ultimately agreed to limit some aspects of Moyer’s role at Google for the term of the agreement. IIRC they've also won others in the past, yes. I also imagine it's not just about actually winning but also about the fact that even if they lose every suit, it would still discourage employees from making the switch if they suspect they will have a legal fight ahead of them (even if the employee knows they'll win).
- dboreham 6y agoThey probably don't expect to win. They just want to throw as much sand in the competitor's faces as possible, and also pay their key staff as little as they can get away with, made easier if there are higher switching costs.
- kyawzazaw 6y agoYup, won to varying degrees. More similar lawsuits here: https://www.geekwire.com/2019/judge-limits-role-former-amazon-sales-exec-aws-vs-google-cloud-non-compete-lawsuit/ https://www.geekwire.com/2019/judge-limits-role-former-amazo...
- hm8 6y agoIt's interesting to see one of the basis of defense is promises made during offer stage. Anecdotally speaking, and I am not remotely close to Hall's position or responsibilities (an engineer) and in the past, the hiring team has always led me to believe that the non-competes are a standard clause and are not likely to be enforced. On a separate note, anybody knows if Google would help with legal defense of Hall or ignore this as a private matter?
- Infinitesimus 6y agoGoogle likely considered legal defense as part of the hiring cost when taking someone that high profile. > the hiring team has always led me to believe that the non-competes are a standard clause and are not likely to be enforced. Your average engineer is likely easily replaceable. Directors and VPs are hard to replace and a huge win for any company that successfully hires them.
- peterkos 6y ago> Google likely considered legal defense as part of the hiring cost when taking someone that high profile Stuff like this is always so fascinating to me: the idea that someone's ability to do their job is worth fighting over in court -- nevermind the cultural costs of bringing someone new into a executive position at a company.
- simonebrunozzi 6y agoThere is a chance that some people with a history worth sharing might not be, and never be, in a position to talk. I personally think that non-compete agreements are a strange beast. On one side, you want to avoid people "switching sides" and bring important secrets with them, possibly the reason why they've been hired by a competitor. On the other side, you want a competitive job market, so that people would get the salary they deserve and the position they deserve.
- m0zg 6y ago> bring important secrets with them BS. That's what NDAs are for.
- myalphabet 6y agoAn NDA is practically unenforceable in this situation, which is the entire point a noncompete is a thing. Who is going to snitch on them for revealing AWS secrets to Google and violating the NDA? Another Google exec?
- m0zg 6y ago> An NDA is practically unenforceable in this situation As we shall see, the non-compete is also unenforceable in this situation, it just costs more to show that it's not. Non-competes are for the "small" people. The bigger question is, why are you carrying water for them? Enforceability of this BS is not in your interest unless you're a major shareholder, and even then non-competes are ethically dubious at best. If what's in his head is so valuable (which I'm almost certain it's not), Amazon should offer to pay him his previous comp for the duration of his non-compete, at the very least, so that he sits it out for a year. What are his options? To not ever work anywhere else again? To radically switch careers upon departure?
- em-bee 6y agodon't need a snitch. they can just assume that it happens and sue anyways. the difficult part is coming up with proof that it actually happened
- seibelj 6y agoWhen there are only 3 companies that compete in a given space, how can job hopping not possibly violate a non-compete? Tech companies should stop using non-competes. Trade secret laws already cover the theft of IP and it just makes the rank-and-file support breaking up big companies.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> When there are only 3 companies that compete in a given space, how can job hopping not possibly violate a non-compete? There are more than three public cloud firms, and in any case you can job hop outside of that space.
- Marsymars 6y agoWhy would the number of companies in a given space affect the possibility of job hopping without violating a non-compete? If you're a chef with a non-compete against working at any other restaurant, that's probably more limiting than a tech non-compete.
- adrr 6y agoHe should have moved to a California first. Quite easy with covid19 and remote work being required.
- kelnos 6y agoI doubt that would have helped, given that he signed the agreement while a resident of a jurisdiction where it was valid. Regardless, I wouldn't uproot myself (and my family, if I had one) for something like this. Non-competes are an abomination and need to go, everywhere. The only alternative I'd accept is what's done in the finance world: you basically get a paid vacation for the term of your non-compete.
- em-bee 6y agoi don't think that matters. what matters is the jurisdiction where he works now. california doesn't want its employed population to be limited by noncompetes. they certainly won't be interested in honoring noncompetes from elsewhere.
- hopfscotch 6y agoThat is not how legal jurisdiction works.
- skinnymuch 6y agoOf course there are certain exceptions, but usually you’re still on the line for getting in trouble in another state. Being in another state doesn’t make you immune. I would be surprised if that’s true even across EU country lines if you’re still within the EU.
- em-bee 6y agoi didn't mean immunity, but i assumed that california law would always override here. turns out it is very much a case of it depends. in the EU non-compete clauses are quite limited and usually require compensation. unreasonable clauses can be invalidated. in germany for example a clause covering the whole country is unreasonable. therefore i think it's unlikely that a clause covering multiple member states would be acceptable. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-compete_clause https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-compete_clause in general there is a mutual recognition of judgements from other states. thinking about this some more, this obviously must be the case, otherwise working across state borders would be difficult. the same must hold true for the USA as well. here is one interesting point: https://www.incegd.com/en/news-insights/recast-brussels-regulation-reinforcing-arbitration-exception https://www.incegd.com/en/news-insights/recast-brussels-regu... The basic rule is that a defendant should be sued in the courts of the EU Member State in which it is domiciled. this would mean if someone were to move to a state where non-competes are unenforceable, then they should indeed likely be able to escape that clause
- pradn 6y agoStandard employment contract clauses stipulate that "we're hiring you for your talents, not your proprietary knowledge". I wonder how much that even matters in court.
- julianeon 6y agoHere's some Tweets about it, the news story + commentary + Hall's humorous response ("some personal news"). http://www.mediazed.com/aws-sues.html http://www.mediazed.com/aws-sues.html disclaimer: this is my own site.
- ctvo 6y agoDon't appreciate you linking your own property that offers little new information except the rehash without an explicit disclaimer.
- julianeon 6y agoOk; I can see people are displeased. I've added a disclaimer, since that was requested. I'd like to take a moment to ask then what is appropriate here, after checking the etiquette guidelines, which I read beforehand and which are linked below. I read them line by line in advance and I didn't see a conflict; to be clear, they don't disallow what I did. However, I'm open to being told what I could do that would be better. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html#:~:text=Please%20don't%20submit%20so,find%20interesting%E2%80%94not%20for%20promotion.&text=Be%20kind https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html#:~:text=Ple.... I can accept not using my own domain name, I can always use another one (that I do not own). In this case, I spent about 15 minutes looking up the tweets around this, and then rearranging them, narrowing it down to just a few that can be a window onto other, better ones. I'll defend that as a value-add. It's not nothing. I quoted the guy at the center of the story, I quoted a couple of people he retweeted, and then I quoted someone who I think has a good perspective on non-competes. I mean yes, with even more effort, I could have summarized him, and the non-compete guy, and written a whole essay about it all, but that's too much, and this was a compromise - not a whole journalist-level article, but a useful, defensible amount. Now, let's look at different ways I could've done the equivalent, using other methods. I could've posted in the raw links, which I guess is the closest solution I know of, which I'd then need to comment on - not ideal, and people would've needed to click like 5 times to get the same functionality of 1 page, but okay. I could've created a Twitter moment, which would then fill my timeline with this (not my preference), and then posted that - still seems like self-promotion, but that way at least it's all reflected on Twitter, and after all I need some method to organize it. To be honest, to me, this seems like an overly restrictive definition of 'self-promotion' which ends up pushing out to objectively worse solutions (boring my followers with this, looking like a lazy dump of plain links, etc.) My perspective is this is the web and remixing content isn't a bad faith action, it's fundamental to what it is. But I understand the concern, and if people want to suggest what is appropriate, I will listen. If you want to make a suggestion for recommended solutions, I'll listen also.
- ponker 6y agoThe text of the contract is unambiguous. If you didn't like it, you shouldn't have signed it.
- anonuser123456 6y agoThat's not quite how the law works.
- ponker 6y agoIt does in Washington State especially at Amazon VP-level positions. This isn’t an entry level clerk who can’t say no to abusive contract language. This is someone making $1m+ a year who could easily walk away from a bad bargain.
- NonEUCitizen 6y agoDon't work for a company outside of California. If you move out of California, work for yourself.
- Supermancho 6y ago> The text of the contract is unambiguous. Text is often ambiguous or can be interpreted to be ambiguous. Tort law isn't as simple as "read the document and make a judgement".
- say_it_as_it_is 6y agoAmazon, everyone knows you monetize open source. It's not a huge secret. Brian Hall hasn't stolen any secret magic recipe that he's now selling to Google.
- dehrmann 6y agoIf you don't want your open-source project used in for-profit projects, license it that way. Amazon is playing by the rules these projects set out, and not by a technicality. That, and the reason some of their services (let's say RDS) are popular is the open source projects backing them were already popular, in part because their licenses are permissive enough for for-profit use. Arguably, this popularity helps the projects. What Amazon is doing with RDS isn't any different from a for-profit company hosting Mysql themselves. They're also not really monetizing open source, at least not any more than a consultant does. What you're really paying for is Amazon to manage it for you--that's their value-add.
- jedberg 6y agoYou know you're cool when you need a lawyer to change jobs. I think it would be reasonable to allow non-competes, however, the company should have to keep paying you your full compensation (salary, stock, bonuses, etc) for as long as they keep you from being employed. Sure, give the old employer veto power for a new job as long as they keep paying them for the lockout period.
- randall 6y agoThis is a good call. Or (at a minimum) some agreed upon fraction of salary.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoCan’t be a fraction. Full comp. That’s what you were worth to them, that’s what you’re worth to not go somewhere else.
- saagarjha 6y agoWhat if you’re entertaining an offer that doubles your pay?
- toomuchtodo 6y agoLots of nuance, but that’s a legitimate comp floor depending on the garden leave requirement, the legitimacy of the offer, etc.
- shefsjsba 6y agoIt should be whatever is highest between your current salary and the new job offer.
- Thorrez 6y agoThat sounds abusable. You get some company (possibly owned by a friend of yours) to offer you a massive salary, then your original company has to pay that massive salary for 3 months or whatever. Then as soon as you start at the new company, they fire you.
- ineedasername 6y agoThis makes me think Amazon it starting to worry a bit more about Google Cloud. Have they been gaining a lot on Amazon recently?
- DevKoala 6y agoI feel the same way. I know that GCP has lured me away from AWS, though I would like to say that has been due to a more simple model for managing resources and exposing documentation, and not much marketing.
- paxys 6y agoI have heard that AWS's Kubernetes offering (EKS) is plagued with bugs and scaling challenges, while Google's is top tier.
- whatthesmack 6y agoCould you go into more detail or provide any resources/blogs on this? We're lightweight users of EKS and I'm interested in avoiding the issues you mentioned.
- paxys 6y agoA lot of what I know is second hand, but I have personally had trouble scaling out a large cluster. AWS's (non-public) limits (# of nodes, API rate limits etc.) fall WAY short of what Kubernetes can support. There is also a lot of configuration and manual work involved to setup and manage the cluster compared to GKE or Azure which are both close to one-click.
- wegs 6y agoI would never, ever, ever use Google Cloud for anything other than education (e.g. students working on the free tiers). Google's general culture is to randomly kill partners' businesses with automated algorithms, and then not do anything about it unless it explodes on social media. That includes multi-million dollar partners sometimes. I'd work for Google, but I wouldn't use their systems outside of Google. I wouldn't work for Amazon, but I definitely use AWS.
- bradj 6y agoThe tech industry just needs to take a cue from the finance industry and standardize garden leave.
- Forge36 6y agoInteresting concept. Would that have prevented the problem here?
- tonyedgecombe 6y agoThat depends on what Amazon's motives were.
- JoshTko 6y agoIt's ironic seeing so many people in this thread being against non-competes, yet seeing so few people for unionizing in other HN threads.
- jedberg 6y agoThat's a pretty standard libertarian viewpoint: Non-competes limit the contracts that I can make. vs Unions limit the contracts that I can make.
- jefftk 6y agoProhibiting non-competes means you can't make a contract with a non-compete provision. Allowing non-competes is less of a restriction on people's freedom to contract. (Personally I think prohibiting non-competes makes employment work better in practice)
- jedberg 6y agoYeah but people don't care about limiting their employer's ability to make contracts. Only their own.
- Thorrez 6y agoBut by being able to give your employer more (the non-compete), you might be able to negotiate more in return. Removing the ability for you to sign a non-compete might limit your benefit.
- marcinzm 6y agoThe perception seems to be that unions hurt well performing employees more than they help. Non-competes are perceived as hurting well performing employees. Why is it surprising that the same group, which perceives itself as well performing employees, would oppose both?
- gxon 6y ago
- jonstewart 6y agoNoncompetes writ large are terrible policy. However, I do think at a given level of seniority/responsibility, they’re reasonable, subject to the usual limitations of time and place. He worked for AWS for ~18 months and then shopped himself to a direct competitor.
- NonEUCitizen 6y agoCalifornians do not consider non-competes reasonable at all, even at that "seniority" level. Search for "Mark Hurd Oracle HP" -- HP was not able to win that case in California.
- dehrmann 6y agoThey're not enforceable in California, so reasonablility doesn't even factor in.
- phonebanshee 6y agoThat reasonable level is certainly nothing below C level. Bezos, sure. Some VP at AWS? No.
- bcantrill 6y agoUgh, this garbage again. AWS came after someone I had hired trying to enforce the same non-compete, under more or less the same circumstances (Washington-based employee, working remote out of California). In the process I learned a bunch about this non-compete, and in particular about Amazon's behavior with respect to it: as of 2012, they had tried to enforce this non-compete "hundreds" of times -- and to the knowledge of the outside counsel we used, had never prevailed. (It's used as a tactic to terrorize their own employees -- and it works wonders.) As for us, we responded to their nasty letter with a nastier letter that told them that we didn't view the employee in violation, that the non-compete was absolutely unenforceable in California and essentially unenforceable in Washington -- and that we were prepared to draw pistols at dawn over it. That was more or less the end of it, but it was traumatizing to the ex-AWS employee, turning an otherwise amicable separation venomous; it's despicable, cowardly behavior. (Also, if anyone needs counsel on the ground in King County to fight this, I have a great recommendation for you; DMs open.)
- tartoran 6y agoI wish more amazon AWS knew about this and not only, other people who are held hostage by non competes. This practice needs to stop. If they dont want their employees poached they should pay to keep.
- tuna-piano 6y agoIt's quite an interesting strategy and for all Amazon's "long-termism", it's a strategy that seems quite short-term focused. It may make their current employees decide not to leave, but it may also lower morale and make future recruits not join. Talk to decision makers deciding which database to buy and see their thoughts about Oracle. Many have been around for decades and have worked for or with the company and refuse to buy their products. This feels like a great way to cement your company as a new Oracle. Your short-sighted mean-spirited moves helped inspire your most dangerous competitor[1]. From Jack Welch - "I have a phrase: love them on the way out — I teach this to my school — love ’em on the way out the way you love them on the way in. And I’ll tell you another one: a severance dollar is the cheapest dollar you’ll ever spend. Those two things, if you practice that religiously, you’ll stay out of trouble, you’ll be perceived as fair. Maybe not loved, initially, but people will come to respect you. That’s why I have an army of friends. Many people who I let go are some of my closest friends." [1]https://observer.com/2019/07/walmart-ecommerce-strategy-amazon-ceo-george-patton/ https://observer.com/2019/07/walmart-ecommerce-strategy-amaz...
- eugenekolo 6y agoStandard operating procedure whenever big wigs move to competitors. Sue so they can't work for some amount of months/years, any information they know is now dated. Win either way no matter how the lawsuit goes.
- lorec0re 6y agofuck you amazon
- mytailorisrich 6y agoWhat usually happens if your new employer wants to keep you (if you're a top executive) is that they cut a deal with your previous one and pay for a settlement.
- stevage 6y ago>awyers for Hall say Amazon executives repeatedly led him to believe the company would not enforce the non-competition provision of its “boilerplate” confidentiality agreement, in discussions before and after he signed the contract in June 2018. After, sure. But anything they say before you sign the contract is totally void, because every contract explicitly says "this is the only contract, anything beforehand is overruled by this".
- wegs 6y agoAfter too. Almost every contract of this type explicitly says that it can only be changed in writing, signed by both sides. Early-career, you'll likely get f-ed by "boilerplate" contracts, since you don't have the negotiating leverage to push back yet. Expect it. Once you're established, push back or don't join. These kinds of litigations don't make the news often (it's to no one's benefit they become public, and everyone signs an NDA at the end), but they're pretty common.
- david-cako 6y agoGood luck with this wiffle-ball strategy. :)
- ezoe 6y agoBetter not be hired by Amazon.
- yashap 6y agoNon-competes should be completely killed. Disclosing confidential trade secrets should be a legal issue, but getting a new job with a competitor shouldn’t be, as long as you don’t share confidential info with them. If you build up a tonne of domain knowledge, and become an expert, you should be able to leverage that expertise by continuing to work in that domain, as long as you aren’t sharing legit secrets.
- Lukas_Skywalker 6y agoI once started a job where the contract contained a very weird clause: I wouldn’t be able to use any programming-related knowledge I gained at the job for my future jobs. Obviously that‘s not enforceable, but it led to a ridiculous discussion where I tried to explain to them that if previous employers did this, I could only use the knowledge I gained before being employed - effectively programming like during highschool. They agreed in the end that I should be allowed to transfer knowledge and the clause was removed.
- mathattack 6y agoIt seems to me that AWS/Azure/GCP/OCI is highly incestuous. They all hop amongst each other. Strange to try and block it.
- chartpath 6y agoAnd yet they don't pay living wages to their non-engineering employees. Greedy scumbags.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- jaworrom 6y agoI am no lawyer, but I am pretty sure an NDA is unenforceable unless damages can be confirmed or confidential information is provably exposed. Then again, this is the case in Texas. I had to deal with this from a previous employer, met with labor law attorneys, they sent a nasty gram back to said previous employer, and said employer backed out.
- sukilot 6y agoIronically, Amazon recruiters tell candidates "Amazon is great for your resume."