There is some discussion about the validity of non-compete agreements in Washington state at the moment. I'm completely on the side of eliminating non-compete a

There is some discussion about the validity of non-compete agreements in Washington state at the moment. I'm completely on the side of eliminating non-compete agreements, but as with everything there are always scenarios where it's not so clear. Case in point: when Kai Fu Lee left Microsoft for Google, Microsoft sued Google and Lee to enforce their non-compete. It took a bit to sort things out, some injunctions and whatnot, and they eventually settled out of court. By hiring Lee, Google was able to establish presence in China. When Microsoft originally hired Lee, he moved to China and established their (MSFT) research division in Beijing. Presumably, Microsoft had to invest resources to learn how to do business in that part of the world and for Lee to learn what was necessary to succeed. Did Microsoft have a claim to say that what Lee learned in China during his employment with them was a competitive advantage? Certainly, but Lee also could lay claim to those skills as well (after all, it was he who had to learn them.) He had a reasonable expectation to be able to move to another company, but Microsoft likely should have a reasonable expectation to protect their investment in learning how to procure and develop that market as well. In some scenarios, I can appreciate arguments from both sides. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kai-Fu_Lee#Move_from_Microsoft_to_Google https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kai-Fu_Lee#Move_from_Microsoft...