It's that Groupons have nonsolicits in their contracts. It isn't that, either. It's that Groupon is rather fancifully implying that, beyond being merely unsee

It's that Groupons have nonsolicits in their contracts. It isn't that, either. It's that Groupon is rather fancifully implying that, beyond being merely unseemly or in bad form, it is somehow "tantamount to contractual interference" for THM to do so. It also implies that THM would "expose itself to litigation" for encouraging Groupon employees to violate their non-competes, an even more baseless assertion.