5 ms·

Blatantly, and has been so for a long, long time. I might be able to buy that Brin circa 2005 was unaware of that, but not Jobs, Schmidt, or Whitman. Edit: It'

Blatantly, and has been so for a long, long time. I might be able to buy that Brin circa 2005 was unaware of that, but not Jobs, Schmidt, or Whitman. Edit: It's been clear at least since Nichols v. Spencer International Press in 1967, and arguably since Radovich v. National Football League in 1957.

kevinthew 13y ago
Yup. This type of stuff is a major no-no and is taught as such in pretty much every entry-level econ and business class. All of these executives know better and were simply trying to skirt the system. There's going to be a huge settlement over this.
- hga 13y ago
  And significant recognition of the issue goes back to at least 1776's The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith: "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices."
  - pekk 13y ago
    Those awful unions. Oh well, back to illegally depressing wages
- tinco 13y ago
  I don't know the U.S. justice system really well, but from the e-mail it seems E. Schmidt was aware of the illegality of their actions, being worried about being sued and a paper trail. Doesn't that make this an 'aware' and 'intentional' crime, therefore the only resolution would be for him to go to prison for some time? Is it really possible for someone to settle their way out of this with a general prosecutor?
- hisabness 13y ago
  who will the settlement be with? i.e. who will get the monies?
  - bradleyjg 13y ago
    I believe there were settlements with the Justice Department, there's also a pending class action lawsuit. The class is all of the employees of the relevant companies during the relevant time period. (I.e. Apple, Intel, Google, Intuit, Pixar, Lucasfilm and Adobe technical employees from 2005 through 2009.) Unfortunately, the US class action system is somewhat corrupt and in many cases the suing attorneys get the lion's share of the money, while the class members get injunctive relief, a coupon, or a nominal payment. Or sometimes they get nothing at all, and a charity gets the money (this is called a cy pres award). More information about the class action lawsuit: https://www.hightechemployeelawsuit.com https://www.hightechemployeelawsuit.com
  - wavefunction 13y ago
    Bradley laid it out well, but I would go even farther. This million employees had significant wage suppression effects for the _entire_ market, not just the employees that were working at the firms in question.
joseph 13y ago
I'm surprised this is illegal. I worked for one company, and was offered a job by another. However, after accepting the offer, their legal department came back to me and said they could not hire me after all, due to having an agreement with my current employer that they cannot hire an employee away from the other within a two year period. My understanding was that this was a contractual agreement between the two companies. How can they have a contract for this if it is illegal, is it different than what Apple and Google did?

kevinthew 13y ago

Yup. This type of stuff is a major no-no and is taught as such in pretty much every entry-level econ and business class. All of these executives know better and were simply trying to skirt the system. There's going to be a huge settlement over this.

hga 13y ago
And significant recognition of the issue goes back to at least 1776's The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith: "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices."
- pekk 13y ago
  Those awful unions. Oh well, back to illegally depressing wages
tinco 13y ago
I don't know the U.S. justice system really well, but from the e-mail it seems E. Schmidt was aware of the illegality of their actions, being worried about being sued and a paper trail. Doesn't that make this an 'aware' and 'intentional' crime, therefore the only resolution would be for him to go to prison for some time? Is it really possible for someone to settle their way out of this with a general prosecutor?
hisabness 13y ago
who will the settlement be with? i.e. who will get the monies?
- bradleyjg 13y ago
  I believe there were settlements with the Justice Department, there's also a pending class action lawsuit. The class is all of the employees of the relevant companies during the relevant time period. (I.e. Apple, Intel, Google, Intuit, Pixar, Lucasfilm and Adobe technical employees from 2005 through 2009.) Unfortunately, the US class action system is somewhat corrupt and in many cases the suing attorneys get the lion's share of the money, while the class members get injunctive relief, a coupon, or a nominal payment. Or sometimes they get nothing at all, and a charity gets the money (this is called a cy pres award). More information about the class action lawsuit: https://www.hightechemployeelawsuit.com https://www.hightechemployeelawsuit.com
- wavefunction 13y ago
  Bradley laid it out well, but I would go even farther. This million employees had significant wage suppression effects for the _entire_ market, not just the employees that were working at the firms in question.

joseph 13y ago

I'm surprised this is illegal. I worked for one company, and was offered a job by another. However, after accepting the offer, their legal department came back to me and said they could not hire me after all, due to having an agreement with my current employer that they cannot hire an employee away from the other within a two year period. My understanding was that this was a contractual agreement between the two companies. How can they have a contract for this if it is illegal, is it different than what Apple and Google did?