3 ms·
It's a non-exclusive deal. No reason for antitrust action whatsoever.
by nabla9 10mo ago
It's a non-exclusive deal.
No reason for antitrust action whatsoever.
- siliconc0w 10mo agoIt's a backdoor acquisition by looting the key talent.
- bilbo0s 10mo agoIt's the opposite of an acquisition. It's literally: "I don't want you and your 200 tensorflow/pytorch monkeys. I just want your top scientist and I need a clever way to offer him a nine figure salary. Good of you to grant him so much stock and not options. Now I can just make a transfer to your shareholders, of which he is one! Awesome! Now I don't have to buy your company!" I'll give you bonus points if you can guess what happens to the worthless options all those TF/PyTorch monkeys are holding? Guys, seriously, be careful who you go to work for, because chances are, you are not the key scientist.
- danny_codes 10mo agoThat’s a loophole. Regulation hasn’t caught up to the innovation of non-exclusive licensing deal. Hopefully we’ll get some competence back in government soon-ish and can rectify the mistake
- nabla9 10mo agoThat's not a loophole. Non-exclusive licensing agreement is the opposite of loophole.
- zipy124 10mo agoNon exclusive deal but also acquiring a lot of the staff, which seems pretty exclusive in that term.
- bilbo0s 10mo agoYeah but that's going nowhere in court right? You can't have the government coming in telling a scientist who he has to work for. People are free to take jobs at whatever company they like. This is just a clever mechanism of paying that intellectual capital an amount of money so far outside the bounds of a normal salary that it borders on obscenity. All that said, I don't say anything when Jordan Love or Patrick Mahomes are paid hundreds of millions, so I need to learn to shut my mouth in this case as well. I just think it sucks for the regular employees. I guarantee they will lose their jobs over the next 24 months.