CA Court Favors Employees in Trade Secret Decision

legal_tinker writes "At grep.law, Tait Graves writes: 'In a majority of states, you can be enjoined from starting a new job because of what you know, even if you have done nothing wrong.' A California court just rejected that idea in California."

Comments

That's not going to happen soon with the FBI!

[G0SP0DAR]

I remember a comical article from /. a while back about the FBI not wanting to hire geeks because so many geeks aren't physically fit. However, that was not the focus of the actual linked story. That basically said that the FBI wants hackers, but their ethical screening keeps them from hiring people who think like hackers. That only eliminates 100% of the candidates! If you know how to gain unauthorized access to a secure network, the FBI wants you, but they won't be able to hire you!

Re:That's not going to happen soon with the FBI!

[Zeinfeld]

That basically said that the FBI wants hackers, but their ethical screening keeps them from hiring people who think like hackers. That only eliminates 100% of the candidates! If you know how to gain unauthorized access to a secure network, the FBI wants you, but they won't be able to hire you!

That is rubbish. Most criminal hackers don't have the skills you would want for a white hat team. Hackers don't pitch their skills against security exerts, they take advantage of the incompetent.

You have to be much smarter than a hacker to catch a hacker. The few people with that level of skill can earn three times as much in industry.

The media promotes this hackers as uber-geeks myth because a) it sells papers and b) they are often socially engineered by the hackers. I watched a TLC program on Mitnick last night, never once did the reporter ask if Mitnick might be socally engineering him with a carefully chosen set of lies to make Mitnick sound like a victim rather than a crook.

Re:That's not going to happen soon with the FBI!

[dboyles]

I agree with your post as a whole, but this part kind of struck me:

I watched a TLC program on Mitnick last night, never once did the reporter ask if Mitnick might be socally engineering him with a carefully chosen set of lies to make Mitnick sound like a victim rather than a crook.

What did you expect?

Interviewer: Mr. Mitnick, are you not telling me the whole story, but rather inventing facts in an attempt to mislead me into believing that you really didn't do anything wrong?

KM: Yes. [pause] Damn!

Re:That's not going to happen soon with the FBI!

[autopr0n]

You have to be much smarter than a hacker to catch a hacker. The few people with that level of skill can earn three times as much in industry.

Three times as much as what? Unethical hackers? I didn't know there were a lot of positions for offensive hackers.

(but I imagine that a position in industrial espionage pays more then a position in security...)

Re:That's not going to happen soon with the FBI!

[Anonymous Coward]

So after meeting all the physical requirements, doing case reviews for 2 years and then working homicide for 5 years, you will suddenly be even better then the standard hacker and make the elite white hat status? I think you missed both G0SP0DAR's point and the original FBI article.

Re:That's not going to happen soon with the FBI!

[CoderDevo]

To rephrase:
The few people with that level of skill can earn three times as much in commercial industry versus what the FBI would pay.

Re:That's not going to happen soon with the FBI!

[Zork the Almighty]

Three times as much as what? Unethical hackers? I didn't know there were a lot of positions for offensive hackers.

The RIAA and MPAA will have plenty of openings for unscrupulous people if the Berman bill gets passed :) Oddly enough, these "unethical hackers" might feel right at home.

Re:That's not going to happen soon with the FBI!

[Sivar]

The media promotes this hackers as uber-geeks myth because a) it sells papers and b) they are often socially engineered by the hackers.
It seems you don't know any real hackers. All that I know are über geeks. They are rare, but true hackers in the strongest sense of the word do exist. Believe it or not, Defcon is still a reasonably good place to see for yourself--you just need to realize that all the people that are easy to notice and look down upon are not the ones to look for.

Re:That's not going to happen soon with the FBI!

[oval_pants]

Have you read "Takedown"? If Mitnick had just stopped his exploits, he would have never gotten caught. He just was extremely cocky.

Re:That's not going to happen soon with the FBI!

[NetFu]

Now, you know you're wrong whenEVER you generalize! You just can't throw out a simple statement like "100% of hackers/crackers would be physically or ethically unfit to join the FBI" without getting a response.

I do serious hacking and cracking and have over 20 years of real computer and programming experience. I was a U.S. Army Airborne Ranger for 6 years, and I'm still more physically fit than most Americans at 6'3" weighing 200 pounds (I do serious workouts every day). I have NO doubt that I could pass the FBI's piddly fitness tests and if you talk to anyone who knows me they'll tell you how ethical I am (much more than most).

So first, the old stereotype that geeks have to be fat, ugly bastards is just that, a stereotype! And second, if I exist (and I don't work for the FBI), don't even doubt for a second that there aren't many more people like me or even better than me who actually work for the FBI -- in other words, the stereotype that government intelligence agencies have no decent techies is yet-another-stupid-stereotype!

Re:That's not going to happen soon with the FBI!

[Anonymous Coward]

No dumbnass, read the comment. 3 times as much as the FBI will pay. Easily that much I would say.

Re:That's not going to happen soon with the FBI!

[gorilla]

It seems you don't know any real hackers.

Most people don't. The majority of 'hackers' are script kiddies.

People Laid off from my company

[sperris]

get a list of authorized companies that they can work for, how about you?

Re:People Laid off from my company

[InternalWave]

And that entire concept is bullshit. I can work for whoever the hell I want to work for.

The other major point being, why should a person be expected to cripple their professional advancement by being forbidden to use knowledge that they have amassed?

This is a very American thing. I hate to say that the influence of it, like patents and copyrights and all the other stuff you guys are perpetrating down there, is starting to poison us elsewhere. Thanks a lot. Yeah, you're the home of the free, alright - my ass.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Scaebor]

Its all a matter of perspective. Look at American policies from the standpoint of some large corporation. For them, this is indeed the land of the free. In America, corporations rule over the individuals of the nation. In Europe, the situation is the opposite (or at least reversed to some extent). I don't like it, but there it is anyway.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[mc6809e]

The other major point being, why should a person be expected to cripple their professional advancement by being forbidden to use knowledge that they have amassed?

The problem is that the person voluntarily gives up the future use of that knowledge to advance professionally now. If they don't agree to the companies terms, they don't get the knowledge in the first place. Sometimes professional advancement takes sacrifices -- long hours, long trips on the road, stress, and sometimes things like signing non-disclosure agreements.


This is a very American thing. I hate to say that the influence of it, like patents and copyrights and all the other stuff you guys are perpetrating down there, is starting to poison us elsewhere. Thanks a lot. Yeah, you're the home of the free, alright - my ass.

Much of the world would like America's prosperity and much of the world envies it. Well, these are the sorts of things you have to do if you want that prosperity.

And like I said before, allowing people to make agreements between themselves is an expression of freedom.

Finally, copyright and patents try to ensure that people responsible for creating the things you enjoy are compensated for it. If you don't compensate them, then you're just using them. Using the product of someone else's labor (creative or otherwise) without compensating them for it is a form of involuntary servitude and thats not freedom -- its the opposite. Now I agree that the system needs reform, but I the priciple is correct: Getting paid for you're work means you're free. Other's using your work without compensating you for it borders on slavery. You're just being used.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[rodgerd]

I can work for whoever the hell I want to work for.

This is true in New Zealand to a large extent. The courts have consistently ruled that restraints of trade in employee contracts (a) cannot stop someone earning a living in their chosen field and (b) must be specifically compensated (that is, if you want me to sit on my hands for six months, you have to pay me something for that six months, not just claim my regular salary covers it).

The only provisions which have been consistently upheld here are the ones relating to forbidding employees from soliciting clients or co-workers from their now ex-employer. Also, all bets are off in the case of redundancy (you can't sack someone and then prevent them from earning a living).

Unfortunately, the popularity of the absurdly facistic contracts becoming standard in the US ("We own everything you've ever thought of now aand for ever and you can never work for anyone doing anything more meaningful than burger-flipping again") has influenced many New Zealand companies in the direction of putting illegal provisions in their emploment contracts - either because they're too stupid to consult a competant employment lawyer, or because they're cynically hoping the threat of legal action will allow them to beat employees into line.

If companies put a fraction of the effort they put into trying to terrorise employees into making them happy while they're still at the company they'd probably get better retention of key personel.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[topham]

Which is exactly why I believe it should be ILLEGAL to place a clause in an employee contract which is expected to be unenforcable.

It would quickly eliminate the crap from the employee agreements.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[topham]

Without wanting to disagree with you, there is a difference between taking general skills in a profession and taking proprietary information with you.

If you read over the courts response VERY carefully you'll see they were not impressed by the actions taken.

When I switched jobs I immediatly told my employer once the decision had been made. This gave them the oportunity to tell me to take a hike (and get paid for it for 2 weeks) and gave them the oportunity to exclude me from any meetings where they may have discussed anything proprietary. (I stayed the 2 weeks at a client site wrapping things up and preparing to train a a replacement. (Which didn't happen, but that was someone elses problem.))

When the guy mentioned here made the decision to leave the company he worked for he did NOT inform them until a later date a couple of weeks later. He entered into an agreement at the beginning of the month and didn't leave the company till half way through. In such a position it is NORMAL to be immediatly dismissed. This guy stayed the 2 weeks to gather the last bit of information he could.

It could have worked out that they would have allowed him to stay on for 2 weeks, to wrap up any outstanding issues and then leave. That isn't up to him though, it was up to his employer.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[beej]

The other major point being, why should a person be expected to cripple their professional advancement by being forbidden to use knowledge that they have amassed?

Because if Person A from Company A simply learns the skill at Company A, and then transfers with that skill and corporate insights to Company B, then Company A stands to lose money, right?

It's simple in the US. When you have a question like yours, all you have to do is understand that someone stands to lose money. That's why you have to sign these things.

This is a very American thing. I hate to say that the influence of it, like patents and copyrights and all the other stuff you guys are perpetrating down there, is starting to poison us elsewhere. Thanks a lot. Yeah, you're the home of the free, alright - my ass.

Wish I could help you, pal. Believe me, since I live here, I really wish I could. I do my best and give generously to the EFF. But by lumping me (and most of the /. crowd) in with "you guys", you're fighting on the wrong side.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[schon]

The problem is that the person voluntarily gives up the future use of that knowledge to advance professionally now.

Sorry, but nobody should have to sign away their life just to 'advance professionally'.

And voluntary? Yeah, just like the kids that work in asian sweatshops. They do it cause they love it, right?

If they don't agree to the companies terms, they don't get the knowledge in the first place.

Umm, how exactly is this 'voluntary'?

Sounds a little like "I'll give you this nice, shiny doughnut if you sell me your soul."

Again, the logic can be (and probably is) used by people who run sweatshops.

If a company wants to keep it's employees, it should treat them like people, not inventory.

Much of the world would like America's prosperity and much of the world envies it.

True enough, but I doubt that you could count any developed nations as part of that.

Well, these are the sorts of things you have to
do if you want that prosperity.

Ahem, bullshit.

In case you hadn't noticed, the US isn't really #1 at anything besides tooting their own horns. With the arguable exception of movie production (which is fraught with it's own evils) I'm hard pressed to think of anything that you're better at than the rest of the world.

And in case you hadn't heard, there are much better (as decided by the UN) places to live and work - primarily because of people with your mindset.

allowing people to make agreements between themselves is an expression of freedom

Yes, but who, exactly keeps watch to ensure that one party isn't being taken advantage of. Someone has to watch out that a megacorp with an army of lawyers doesn't take advantage of it's workers.

Or do you believe that all labour laws should be abolished, and we should return to the 'good old days' of child factory workers, and indentured servitude? Because that's exactly where your argument takes you.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Anonymous Coward]

Because if Person A from Company A simply learns the skill at Company A, and then transfers with that skill and corporate insights to Company B, then Company A stands to lose money, right?
But has the company relinquished all rights to said information when they layed that person off?
In my book if I sign a non disclosure agreement with said company that is only valid if I decide to quit. If the company decides that they no longer can afford to employ me then they have violated the "spirit" of this agreement.
Isn't this also like a contract. I sign this paper and say that I will not work for a competing company and in consideration you will pay me X amount of $ per period then as long as you keep up your part of the contract I'm obliged to keep up mine. BUT if you lay me off then you have violated your (the company's) contractual obligations therefore the contract is null and void; as you have failed/refused to live up to your part of this contract.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[rodgerd]

In New Zealand law, I believe the placement of unenforable clauses has been rule, in the past, to invalidate other clauses, leaving default employment law coverage in place. So, for example, if you have a legit restraint of trade (no poaching clients) with illegitiate clauses (you may not work for any company in any related field in a 50 km radius of the city you currently work in, a real clause from one of mine), you can poach clients, because that's been struck down.

The courts here have ruled that way in an effort to prevent contracts being loaded up with rubbish; I've seen companies respond by then explicity state that provisions struck down shall not affect the validity of other provisions. I'm not sure why they feel trying to contract out of the law of the land will work, but there you are.

(Usual disclaimers apply - IANAL, consult your lawyer, etc).

To reiterate: if bufoons in HR departments and managerial roles spent this time on thinking of ways to keep the staff happy, they'd find far fewer retention problems.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Stephen VanDahm]

"Much of the world would like America's prosperity and much of the world envies it. Well, these are the sorts of things you have to do if you want that prosperity."

Saying that in order to be as prosperous as the US, you have to do everything the American way is like saying that since Grandpa Earl smoked a pack a day and lived to be 100, the secret to long life is to chain smoke. Perhaps NDAs and aggressive IP laws contributed to our prosperity, but perhaps if we didn't have those things, we'd be even more prosperous. Things are too complicated to easily determine what has and hasn't contributed to our success.

I think that there's something essentially un-American about aggressive IP laws. I understand the need to foster creativity, but no one owes anyone else a living. If I rip off your copyrighted work, then you have the right to track me down and prosecute me. But laws like the DMCA restrict consumer choice and consumer freedom based on something that they might do in the future -- this really is an attack on our freedom. Corporations and individuals ought to have IP rights, but the responsibility of looking after those rights belongs to the patent/copyright holder, not to Congress, and not to the regular law-abiding citizen. I don't download MP3's and DIVX movies, and I shouldn't have to be penalized for someone else's problem. If they can't or don't want to track down individual violations, then they should change their business model. No one put guns to the heads of Hollywood execs and told them to make movies.

Steve

Re:People Laid off from my company

[TarPitt]

Much of the world would like America's prosperity and much of the world envies it. Well, these are the sorts of things you have to do if you want that prosperity.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[TarPitt]

Much of the world would like America's prosperity and much of the world envies it. Well, these are the sorts of things you have to do if you want that prosperity.

And thanks to this judge's ruling, California is no longer part of America?

Re:People Laid off from my company

[kcbrown]

Much of the world would like America's prosperity and much of the world envies it. Well, these are the sorts of things you have to do if you want that prosperity.

I don't think so. The noncompete clauses in contracts are, I believe, a relatively recent invention. I don't believe they're more than 20 years old or so. I seriously doubt they existed back when the U.S. was becoming the power that it is today. Rather, it appears to me (having been around a little while) that the appearance and enforcement of noncompete clauses came about at roughly the same time that corporations started getting restrictive IP laws like the DMCA on the books. In other words, it looks to me like yet another symptom of the same disease.

But, of course, I could be wrong...

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Stephen VanDahm]

"This is a very American thing. I hate to say that the influence of it, like patents and copyrights and all the other stuff you guys are perpetrating down there, is starting to poison us elsewhere."

Do they not have elections where you live? The American people are responsible for what has happened in America, but we don't vote in Canadian, Australian, or European elections, so what happens there isn't our fault.

Of course, the United States has a lot of political and economic power, and we use that to pressure other countries into doing what we want. This puts Europe (as an example) in the difficult position of having to choose whether to cave in or to stick up for itself. However, there is a choice, and if Europeans choose poorly, it's their own fault.

Steve

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Anonymous Coward]

get a list of authorized companies that they can work for, how about you?

Yeah, the list I got was short:

• McDonalds
• 7/11
• Starbucks

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Doomdark]

Much of the world would like America's prosperity and much of the world envies it. Well, these are the sorts of things you have to do if you want that prosperity.

Yes, yes, no. These are not required, necessary or beneficial. The real american values that have helped prosperity are good work ethics, faith in everyone having a chance to succeed, and (relative) lack of people envying each other's wealth.

Your value of "let the [big] company coerce its employees to sign whoopass legal contracts because it has the power to do so" does not appear on list of favourable conditions for nations' prosperity.

As to "... allowing people to make agreements between themselves..." would be fine, if and only if:

Parties involved have equal rights and responsibilities. This doesn't seem to be the case in company vs. employees.

Neither of parties would be able to coerce the other party to legally binding one-side contracts. You can claim that "you don't have to work that company", but the reality is that there's virtual oligopoly of "make 'em donate their kidney" - minded employer that use draconian employment contracts.

And as much as many people hate the idea, governments / parliaments are about only external parties that could help balance this imbalance of power. Courts can help in some way by interpreting the laws, but they don't write the laws.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Doomdark]

I agree 110%. The thing I hate is that I'm now starting to see same of kind legasleaze in other places. Last one was the gym I go to. Their latest "waiver of rights" I had to sign basically said "you can leave your kid here at totlot [being a member and paying a fee] but if (s)he gets hurt, even if it's due to our gross incompetence or abuse, you can't sure us" (and although that's not word-by-word quote I'm not exaggerating here).

I hate the fact companies are making people sign all kinds of waivers -- enforceable or not -- just because "it doesn't cost any", and just might be useful in future. And then they even sometimes admit "yeah we know it's not valid so there's no harm signing" (when someone points out contract stinks). Disgusting.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[repetty]

Whoa, cowboy! You got excited, didn't you?

For what it's worth, American's are number one in a lot of things.

Me thinks my compatriot pressed one of your insecurity buttons.

You realize, don't you, that when you (non-Americans) start preaching you merely come off sounding like jealous little children?

You may be right on many of your points, but you can't seriously think that you are impressing anyone but yourself when you become unbalanced in a public forum. I believe that the newsgroups are the traditional venues for this type of thing.

Frankly, unless you've immersed yourself in our culture and learned to appreciate its shortcomings and strengths and unless we immersed ourselves in your culture and became familiar with its strengths and weaknesses, most anything either of us say amounts to nothing more than boosterism.

--Richard

PS: This Friday night, I'm going to attend
a football game for my son's high school.
I'm sure that there's something that you do
that's similarly pleasurable.

PPS: I don't think the UN knows anything
about my son's high school football games.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Anonymous Coward]

Interestingly, I have an appointment on Friday with a lawyer (my first ever dealings with one) to go over some clauses in my New Zealand employment contract to see if they are reasonable. The clauses include:

Not working for 6 months for a company in the same line of business as my employer. (Not a problem - if I leave, I'd be looking for more of a change anyhow.)

Not poaching company employees for 6 months or so.

An IP clause which definately says that any bright ideas I have directly relating to my employer's business belong to them - fair enough - but is very confusing to me whether it covers anything else (e.g. if I invent a time machine.)

A clause saying that if any part of the contract is found to be unenforcable, it doesn't affect the enforcability of the rest. (I.e. to try to contract out of the case you give above.)

A clause that says that I agree that they can file an injunction against me to prevent me from breaking any of the conditions of the contract. (It seems to me that if they have a legitimate cause to file an injunction, they can do so without my having signed this clause.)

(I'm also being anonymously cowardly for the first time.)

Re:People Laid off from my company

[DEBEDb]

The problem is that the person voluntarily gives up the future use of that knowledge to advance professionally now.

Nobody does any such thing. You give up
some vaguely specified rights in exchange
for some benefits. This vagueness is then
subject to dispute. I think I agreed not
to use your proprietary algorithms, you think
I agreed not to use library X which I learned
on the job. It can even be an honest disagreement,
and things are not as clear-cut.

For example, I've seen agreements that say
that I give the right to whatever inventions
I make "while rendering services to the Company" (paraphrased). I read that "while" as "9-5 Monday-Friday", a corporate droid may read that as "from
your first second at the job until you are out
the door for good". Everybody tries to derive their own benefit from this vague language. This
is what the courts are for.

And like I said before, allowing people to make agreements between themselves is an expression of freedom.

Is allowing people to sign a pact whereupon
one becomes another's slave for life and
subject to organ harvesting at any whim also
an expression of freedom? If you are willing
to go this far, I will grant you that. And
I'll raise you that breaking agreements
upon changing one's mind is no less an expression
of freedom!

See, it all just depends on how far you're willing
to take your sophistry.

This is actually what turned me off to Randians
and the like in the first place, but I digress...

Re:People Laid off from my company

[lemkebeth]

I personally refuse to sign such things.

If I'm getting a service cfrom them I take my business elsewhere.

If it is an employer, I flatly tell them no, even if I have to find another job as I'm not about to cripple myself for their benefit. Especially since, I'm discriminated against enough as it is.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Guppy06]

"True enough, but I doubt that you could count any developed nations as part of that."

As an example, Ottawa is trying to figure out how to fix the way that the Canadian standard of living is only about 75% of the US without actually getting too involved in the US market (as Canadian productivity is also a bit lower than US and they'll get mauled).

And they're a G-8 member.

"In case you hadn't noticed, the US isn't really #1 at anything besides tooting their own horns."

If we really don't do anything better than anybody else, how is it that less than 5% of the world's population is responsible for over 25% of the planet's gross domestic product? Dumb luck?

"And in case you hadn't heard, there are much better (as decided by the UN) places to live and work - primarily because of people with your mindset."

Got links?

(Of course, I could be cynical and point out that this is the same UN that feels that Sudan is a better member of the Commission on Human Rights than the US. But I won't, if for no other reason than because at least three trolls will respond to that statement saying something to the effect of "John Ashcroft has made us worse than Sudan!" and will get modded up to +5 Insightful)

"Yes, but who, exactly keeps watch to ensure that one party isn't being taken advantage of."

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."

Re:People Laid off from my company

[DreamerFi]

If we really don't do anything better than anybody else, how is it that less than 5% of the world's population is responsible for over 25% of the planet's gross domestic product? Dumb luck?

Creative accounting. Flipping burgers adds USD 5 per hour to your countries gross domestic product, while it takes highly skilled work to do the add the same 5 bucks per hour in a third world country. I don't think gross domestic product is a good number to use in this particular comparison.

-John

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Grishnakh]

For what it's worth, American's are number one in a lot of things.

Like what, besides blowing shit up and starting wars? Sure, the US has the most powerful military, but that's the only thing I can think of that it's #1 in.

Frankly, unless you've immersed yourself in our culture and learned to appreciate its shortcomings and strengths and unless we immersed ourselves in your culture and became familiar with its strengths and weaknesses, most anything either of us say amounts to nothing more than boosterism.

Well I am an American, so I know "our" culture (if you can call it that) completely, and still agree with the original poster.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Grishnakh]

I could be cynical and point out that this is the same UN that feels that Sudan is a better member of the Commission on Human Rights than the US.

Is this the same US that has the highest per-capita incarceration rate in the world? The same US that imprisons people with no charges, in secret locations, for months on end? The same US where people waiting on death row are being freed left and right because of DNA evidence (too bad for the innocent ones that were first in line for the chair)?

How exactly do you think the US excels in human rights?

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Grishnakh]

California is so different from the rest of the US, they should secede. Watch what happens to the rest of the country when >50% of the tech industry is no longer within their borders.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Anonymous Coward]

You realize, don't you, that when you (non-Americans) start preaching you merely come off sounding like jealous little children?

You realize, don't you, that it only sounds like jealousy to an American, like you, who is brainwashed into believing he and his country are totally superior.

America is like an average-looking insecure girl. All her life her parents have told her how pretty she is (as parents are wont to do). Then one day when someone else tells her that she's not so pretty, she gets defensive. She may lash out at her detractor.

And don't even MENTION the other girls who are prettier than her. "What's she got that I haven't got? I could kick her skanky little ass!"

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Fat Casper]

If they're firing you, get a job at a real competitor. They've decided that they don't need you anymore. If they can't realize that loyalty goes both ways and extends beyond quarterly reports, screw 'em. If those "authorized" companies were such a good match, why doesn't HR get together with their HRs for a little placement? Oh, because McDonald's and Wal-Mart are at the top of the list, right?

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Anonymous Coward]

What difference does it make what the US's incarceration rate is, as long as their system of justice is equitable?

Re:People Laid off from my company

[shilly]

He didn't say that he thought that the US excels in human rights. He compared the US's human rights record with that of Sudan -- which has a truly appalling human rights record, far worse than that of the US. In any event, the original poster is confusing Sudan with Libya (which also has an appalling human rights record).

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Drownedrat]

In case you hadn't noticed, the US isn't really #1 at anything besides tooting their own horns. With the arguable exception of movie production (which is fraught with it's own evils) I'm hard pressed to think of anything that you're better at than the rest of the world.

Now that's just unfair and untrue. Americans (as a whole) consume more resources and energy and create more waste (including many of the movies)than anyone else on the planet. Several times over if memory serves.

Credit where credit is due.

D.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[cascadingstylesheet]

And in case you hadn't heard, there are much better (as decided by the UN) places to live and work - primarily because of people with your mindset.

Oh, the UN, well, that settles it then. Call us when they vote to move the UN headquarters to Dumbfukistan ;) How do they suffer through their cushy posts in NY? Yep, having representatives from all the world gather in NY in a nice building to criticize us and then beg for money really makes me feel inferior ;)

The /. anti-US crowd has a bit of a psychological problem ... do I really have to explain why you feel motivated to slam the top dog at every turn? Hint: it ain't because he's not #1 ...

And as a final note, I'm replying to you. You felt the need to reflexively bash, and I'm just replying. I don't need to toot my own horn, unless something comes buzzing around and needs to be blown away.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[umask077]

You are very wrong thinking that were only #1 at war. What about consumption, arogance, and waste?

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Kierthos]

No, no. Berkeley is so different from the rest of the US. Large portions of California outside of Berkeley are amazingly normal.

Kierthos

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, I could be cynical and point out that this is the same UN that feels that Sudan is a better member of the Commission on Human Rights than the US.

Yeah, I mean who could trust someone like the United Nations to subjectivly measure that? I think it would be far fairer if every country got to rate themselves, maybe on a scale of 1 to 10. Then we'll see whos the best!

Moron.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, the United States has a lot of political and economic power, and we use that to pressure other countries into doing what we want. This puts Europe (as an example) in the difficult position of having to choose whether to cave in or to stick up for itself. However, there is a choice, and if Europeans choose poorly, it's their own fault.

Yeah, its just like that bully at school who would steal your lunch money. He was just applying pressure and putting you in a difficult situation. Just because you chose poorly, well that was your own damn fault.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[schon]

Whoa, cowboy! You got excited, didn't you?

I think that it's interesting that instead of attacking my position, and telling me WHERE I was wrong, or under the wrong impression, you attack my character or state of mind.

Kind of like saying "I hate you for saying that stuff, but I know you're right about everything, so I'll call you a doodyhead instead."

American's are number one in a lot of things.

Ahh, such as? Perhaps I only got the Reader's Digest version of your post, but I didn't see you actually name any of them.

unless you've immersed yourself in our culture and learned to appreciate its shortcomings and strengths ... most anything either of us say amounts to nothing more than boosterism

Hate to break it to you, but I'm Canadian - I'm "immersed" in your culture every day. Better than 70% of anything on my TV is American; more than 90% of movies shown in theatres here is American.

Just because your media doesn't take an interest in other countries, and you don't get TV programs from other countries, doesn't mean that the reverse isn't true.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm hard pressed to think of anything that you're better at than the rest of the world.

How about attracting people from your part of the world to work here? But I guess you're smarter than they are.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Guppy06]

"Flipping burgers adds USD 5 per hour to your countries gross domestic product, while it takes highly skilled work to do the add the same 5 bucks per hour in a third world country."

300,000,000 x $5.00 x 40 x 52 = $3,120,000,000,000

That still leaves $6,880,000,000,000 unaccounted for. And that's even assuming that, if everybody was flipping burgers, people would want or could afford to buy those burgers.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[macrom]

Sounds a little like "I'll give you this nice, shiny doughnut if you sell me your soul."

As long as it's a Krispy Kreme...where do I sign?

Re:People Laid off from my company

[schon]

"And in case you hadn't heard, there are much better (as decided by the UN) places to live and work - primarily because of people with your mindset."

Got links?

Of course

Or would you prefer something from CNN?

Ottawa is trying to figure out how to fix the way that the Canadian standard of living is only about 75% of the US without actually getting too involved in the US market

Ahem, "Got Links?.

Considering that Candada has ranked higher than the US for as long as I can remeber (in the UN study, it's been #1 for the past six years straight,) I find this claim dubious.

who, exactly keeps watch to ensure that one party isn't being taken advantage of.

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."

You didn't answer my question, you just repeated it. Here, I'll post it again:

WHO keeps watch?

Re:People Laid off from my company

[schon]

Oh, the UN, well, that settles it then.

It should, unless you can show me a report from an another unbiased agency that states otherwise. The UN is as close to unbiased as you can get.

having representatives from all the world gather in NY in a nice building to criticize us and then beg for money

Ahh, where they hold their meetings should be irrelevant. IIRC the reason that it's in the US is because that was a condition set by you.

And they don't "criticize" you and then beg for money. Once per year, they rank 160 or so countries based on "per capita income, health care, life expectancy and educational levels

It's not criticizing you (unless you think that saying that someone else is #1) is considered criticizing.

If you want to be ranked higher, do something about it (And I don't mean invading another country.)

do I really have to explain why you feel motivated to slam the top dog at every turn?

Nobody is slamming any "top dog" - they're pointing out that the US isn't the best country in the world in which to live.

Hint: it ain't because he's not #1

No, it's because he THINKS he's #1, when (at least last year), he's #6.

I'm replying to you. You felt the need to reflexively bash

No, I didn't - I felt the need to correct some wrong assumptions made by mc6809e - assumptions that seem to be an epidemic. mc6809e believes that the US is #1 (which it isn't), and that they're #1 because corporations had (or have) the right to trample over worker's rights (which also isn't true.)

Call us when they vote to move the UN headquarters to Dumbfukistan

If anyone is "reflexively bashing", it sounds like it's you.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[DreamerFi]

That still leaves $6,880,000,000,000 unaccounted for.

Of course. I was just trying to say that a comparison based on gross domestic product is not a very good way to make the judgement you made. I could also say, looking at your calculation, that not everybody is working 52 weeks, or 40 hrs/wk, or a number of other fatal flaws in the basic calculations - but they don't really matter, my point was that the comparison wasn't very useful...

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Grishnakh]

No, I realize Berkeley is totally unique even for California, but CA ifself is very different from the rest of the US. Witness this ruling against idiotic employment contracts; CA has many laws against employers taking advantage of employees through things like noncompete clauses, which more conservative states don't have. I got screwed by one of these when I was working in Virginia, and there wasn't anything I could do about it. I ended up having to move out of state. Don't work in Virginia; it's not employee-friendly like CA.

CA was also, I believe, the first state to pass a statewide ban on smoking in indoor public places (bars, restaurants, etc.). There are some other localities that have done this also, but not state-wide. Can you imagine this happenning in Texas, or anywhere in the South (tobacco country)?

And of course, the politics are totally different; notice that Republicans never win that state.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[RealAlaskan]

Sorry, but nobody should have to sign away their life just to 'advance professionally'.
And voluntary? Yeah, just like the kids that work in asian sweatshops. They do it cause they love it, right?

That's actually an excellent analogy. In both cases, they do it because it beats the alternative. In both cases, the solution is not to prevent them from taking the best (but still bad) alternative, but rather to provide better alternatives. That's hard, and doesn't make for good fund-raising soundbites, so it's hard to get folks to work in that direction.

In this case, an expanding economy with more jobs than workers would enable American workers to just say no to bad contracts. In the mean time, this decision goes a long way to even the balance of power between employers and employees in California. Outlawing non-compete agreements, on the other hand, would prevent mutually beneficial agreements along with the ones which were bad for the employees.

... there are much better (as decided by the UN) places to live and work ...

``As decided by the UN''? Isn't this the outfit that put Syria in charge of human rights? If the UN doesn't like us, we must be doing something right. Seriously, the US gets a net inflow of immigrants from those ``better'' places, so I wouldn't take that UN drivel too seriously.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[pod]

In New Zealand law, I believe the placement of unenforable clauses has been rule, in the past, to invalidate other clauses

That's bullshit. Even New Zealand must have an equivalant to a severance clause. That is, if one clausein a contract is struck down, others still stand, provided they still make reasonable sense after the one that got removed. Standard contract law in US and Canada.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't have a job, do you?

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't knock the US war capability too much. As I recall the lingua franca of most of Europe could have ended up being either German or Russian if it weren't for those pesky war-mongering Americans.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh - do you have any idea of the kind of things that go on in Sudan? One can disagree over capital punishment in the US, but at least the US has trials, and they don't specifically engineer torture into their executions.

Bottom line is that majority-rules is probably the best system for running governments - but the majority vote doesn't change the truth - whatever it may be.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Skjellifetti]

And of course, the politics are totally different; notice that Republicans never win that state.

Too young to remember that Ronald Reagen used to gov of CA? The guy before Grey Davis was a Republican, too, IIRC.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[lemkebeth]

Actually, I was on co-op during the summer and will be again this summer.

Nowhere did I sign such a form.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Guppy06]

> > "And in case you hadn't heard, there are much
> > better (as decided by the UN) places to live and
> > work - primarily because of people with your
> > mindset."

From the looks of the article you pointed to, the US ranked sixth mostly because our life expectancy at the time was a hair under some of the others (and it looks like they were splitting hairs in at least the top ten). No mention of patriotic zealots.

"Ottawa is trying to figure out how to fix the way that the Canadian standard of living is only about 75% of the US without actually getting too involved in the US market"

Comments from a Canadian Parliament publication on the Canadian standard of living and the productivity gap. The table of contents of the whole thing can be found here. Needless to say, both of these topics have made the arguments for and against adopting either the US Dollar or a united North American currency in Canada to be more heated than it would be otherwise.

"You didn't answer my question, you just repeated it. Here, I'll post it again:

WHO keeps watch?"

My answer: ultimately, you do. If you have trouble understanding what a contract says when you read it or have difficulty trusting the other party, perhaps you should consider not signing it.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[johnnyb]

One point of America is that there are many freedoms which _cannot_ be removed. Basically, if the entire hiring community adopts certain standards that require people to relinquish their rights, how does one find a job? Especially since the contract terms aren't know until late in the process. Therefore, it is reasonable to reject such unreasonable contract terms.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Muddle]

Glad to see some one actually understood the article instead of tearing off on some rant about Mr. Mitnick.
First post I saw who's poster had a clue.
In the past I've been forced to sign several of these types of contracts to keep or get a job at another company as a Repair Technician.
The ones I signed basically bar one from going to work for the competition or setting up your own shop within a certain geographical distance for a period of three to five years.
They are used for the most part to harass former employees forcing them to move so that the knowledge they gained while working for a company is not used against that company.
As a former Tech. I have always understood that they are not worth the paper they are written on because of point (a) in the above post.
These types of contracts rarely end up in a court room they are for the most part just used to harass however, one usually has to hire a lawyer to get one's former employer to cease this harassment.
I myself used to receive nasty letters about once a week from a former employer.
A lot depends on whether the current employer is willing to back the Technician because typically one cannot afford lawyers and court costs.
Show me a Technician and I'll show you someone with little or no money saved up because they are usually paid a lot less than the lowest paid factory worker in said town, despite their knowledge, expertise and the fact that they can generate over $100.00 and hour for the company. Ten years ago when I got out of the repair business that was the rate, it's probably double that now but, I wouldn't know as I fix my own equipment and have not ever called someone else to come do it.
This is also one tool employers use to keep wages low because the tech cannot move to another site across town that might offer better pay and benefits to get the best techs working for them, without the fear of harassment thus, all shops can profit by offering low wages and worthless benefits.
Most shop owners I've known typically live in mansions, some with in ground swimming pools, private jets etc. while there employees typically live in trailer courts or, some other substandard type of housing, living from paycheck to paycheck hoping the checks they write during the work week don't bounce. The only person in a tech repair shop that typically makes enough money to keep their head above water is the Manager who in my opinion usually makes more than they are worth to the company because, often they have risen through the ranks to a point above the level of their competence.

Re:People Laid off from my company

[Doomdark]

That makes sense, unfortunately in some cases the alternative may be worse than signing. In my case I'm a member, and changing to another gym would be costly.

Other than that I certainly wish people would do like you do; and I usually try to follow the same principle.

Anyone else?

[hkhanna]

Did anyone else notice the Grep Law website uses slashcode? That's pretty f'in awesome. Go Slash!

Good.

[Anonymous Coward]

A company can easily screw you over.

Obviously, non-disclosure agreements are fair, but many companies will require you to not take a job with another company working on similar projects for X number of months/years/etc. If you do, they sue you.

Now, similar is a word that includes everything when it comes to computers. If you're a true specialist in a certain area of technology, you've even more troubles in this area.

What happens if you inadvertantly piss someone off? Oops, you've been fired, and you can't go back to work, because if you do, you get sued. Woohoo! Go go unemployment!

Until stuff like that is prevented, have some free advice. Read, very carefully, the little contracts that your employer will attempt to make you sign. Hell, grab a lawyer if you're uncomfortable. It'll cost a bit of money to do that, but it's better than being unable to work other than in a McDonald's for a lengthy span of time.

Re:Good.

[WizardX]

That is really only true in certain states, NY being one of the worst offenders. Here in WI we are what is sometimes refered to as a right to work state. Simply put, by and large non-compete agreements (note to parent and et al are different from and NDA as NDA's cover only proprietary info), are not worth the paper they are written on. Sure, a company can force a person to abide by the non compete, if they are willing to pay the persons salary during the period of the non compete. (Like that will happen)

Usually the only other time they are upheld is if they are very narrowly and specifically defined, and do not prevent a person from attaining gainful employment in area of their expertice for a similar salary.

That is just Wisconsin, YMMV, like in New York, where you are basically screwed.

IANAL

this is one of those laws

[ohzero]

that can have different outcomes based on only opinions and interpretations, not facts. Let's just say I had an inordinate amount of knowledge about network security because I worked at say...@steak, but then I left @steak to join say...ISS. Well, if for whatever reason @steak doesn't want me working at ISS, then they can bring their meathammers down on me in court, and seeing as how I would be the individual facing a corporate lawsuit, the massive burden of legal expenses would be on me, whereas it's just a write off for the company. It effectively gives prior employers complete control of your future employment if you were smart enough to have learned anything at your last job.

Re:this is one of those laws

[fgb]

@stake is the security company... but @steak sounds delicious ;)

Re:this is one of those laws

[rhombic]

It's called intentional interference, and if their case is without merit, you're going to at least get your legal fees back, probably also get a good chunk of what would have been your salary at the other company.

Re:this is one of those laws

[ohzero]

Which is completely not the point. The point is that I have in depth knowledge of @steak's (yes it was a pun) tech, or biz practices or whatever. They feel that this is valuable enough to sue my ass off. Individual VS. COMPANY. Companies, generally speaking, have alot more resources than individuals and can basically outspend them in court. It happens all the time. That, in combination with this law is a recipe for disaster.

An "American" thing.

[Stoptional]

As someone said - this is very much an *American* thing.

By the way - I'm a little pissed that the U.S. of A. has taken ownership of the name "America(n)". Mexicans & Canadians are "Americans" by definition. But of course, it IS Spanish LOL

Blue pencil rule

[kefoo]

Fortunately here in Ohio (I don't know about other states) we have a law called the blue pencil rule. It allows a judge to rewrite a non-compete clause in an employment contract if it's too restrictive and prevents someone from finding new employment.

Re:Blue pencil rule

[machine of god]

So as an employer, I could get around that by printing on blue paper right?

USA arrogance.

[Anonymous Coward]

Much of the world would like America's prosperity and much of the world envies it. Well, these are the sorts of things you have to do if you want that prosperity.

Crap. We don't want to be like America at all. That's very typical of the kind of Septic arrogance we could do without. We don't envy American (Govt) war mongering, engineering of governments (Who trained Osama and installed the dictatorship in Iraq in the first place?). We have better economic growth than the USA. We are better at steel manufacture and lamb production than you are. We have better social policy - we look after our poor people better. We have fewer homeless people, slums. We have accessible healthcare for all, not just the rich. We have a nicer climate overall. We have more glorious beaches with fewer people. We rarely have to queue for anything for more than five minutes. Our hospitals are not full of gunshot wounded.

All we want is a fair go. You get to club us with a big stick if we put a trade tariff on, and you tariff our stuff right out of your market. And should we complain about your trade tariffs and win in the World Trade Organisation, you just tell us to get stuffed. And stuff all we can do about it. You regularily steal our markets overseas with your government subsidies. You trash the world environment and you won't let anyone else attempt to clean up (Kyoto).

We don't envy you. We want you to grow up, and look after what you have and leave the rest of us alone. And while you're at it, you might get your UN dues paid.

You don't have to grind everyone else into the ground to get ahead. Non Disclosure Non Compete Crap. Patents Office should be paid for quality not quantity. Copyright and Patents do not get people fairly compensated for what they do. Just ask Janis Ian. Just ask a chinese Nike factory worker. If you don't look after the poor people, they must rob you to survive. And that applies to countries too.

Disclaimer. I do have friends in the USA who are just as horrified by the pervasive ignorance of their compatriots as I am.

I post anon because I don't like being attacked by the idiots in the majority.

Re:USA arrogance.

[Guppy06]

"We don't envy American (Govt) war mongering, engineering of governments"

What, you're more proud of European government engineering? Proud of the examples certain EU members have mde of various African and SE Asian countries?

"We have better economic growth than the USA."

First off, after the past year I doubt it. Secondly, just because you're growing faster doesn't mean you've caught up yet.

"We have better social policy - we look after our poor people better. We have fewer homeless people, slums. We have accessible healthcare for all, not just the rich. We have a nicer climate overall."

These have beeen brought up so often that I'm actually getting curious whether or not anybody really has any data on this to back these up.

"We have more glorious beaches with fewer people."

Only if you assume all beaches in the US are on the Florida penninsula, southern California, or Oahu.

"We rarely have to queue for anything for more than five minutes."

And by that I assume you're suggesting that we do?

"Our hospitals are not full of gunshot wounded."

Oh really?

"You get to club us with a big stick if we put a trade tariff on,"

Unless it's GM food, huh? Or just about any produce, for that matter? Bananas ring any bells?

"You trash the world environment and you won't let anyone else attempt to clean up (Kyoto)."

About the only way we're preventing Kyoto from being implemented (which we aren't... or "weren't") is by not signing on. IMO, trying to claim that that is our way of actively trying to prevent outher countries from implementing Kyoto themselves is really stretching it.

"And while you're at it, you might get your UN dues paid."

We might, as soon as UN diplomats start paying off their NYC parking/traffic tickets.

"Disclaimer. I do have friends in the USA who are just as horrified by the pervasive ignorance of their compatriots as I am."

I dislike blind patriotism myself, but I fail to see how your post makes you any better than those you claim to dispise. You don't like how pro-American jingoists make overly-broad, baseless and unprovable statements, but you think that your anti-American jingoism is somehow better? "Proving" that the US is the Great Satan requires just as much proof as "proving" the US is utopian. And either way, silly little catch phrases bleated out by political activist sheep just won't cut it.

"I post anon because I don't like being attacked by the idiots in the majority."

You think you're in the minority here? Obviously you're new to Slashdot. I'm surprised there isn't a "+1 Anti-American" mod option yet.

Re:USA arrogance.

[frost22]

And while you're at it, you might get your UN dues paid."

We might, as soon as UN diplomats start paying off their NYC parking/traffic tickets.

This is a classic and very dishonest fake argument.

When the US of A applied for getting the UN seat in NY, you entered into contracts. Part of these contracts is that UN diplomats are not required to pay these traffic tickets. So, just honor your own contracts please (something you would do well in other cases, too; re WTO, re Consulary affairs etc - you guys have a disturbing habit to publicly piss on the very contracts you made).

Moreover you know perfectly well that the US nonpayment of UN dues is not related to those traffic tickets but based on the US demand for more influence on UN policy than they already are entitled to based on the UN charta.

Are the rest of your "Arguments" of similar quality here ?

Go figure...

Re:USA arrogance.

[Anonymous Coward]

>> "Our hospitals are not full of gunshot wounded."
>
> Oh really?

Uh, yeah. Really. Man, I can see you were the star student in the debate team!

Re:USA arrogance.

[Guppy06]

"When the US of A applied for getting the UN seat in NY, you entered into contracts. Part of these contracts is that UN diplomats are not required to pay these traffic tickets. So, just honor your own contracts please"

In case you haven't noticed, we're paying the UN enough money to continue to be a part of the UN. We are meeting our obligations as spelled out by the UN Charter.

Cuts both ways, don't it?

"Moreover you know perfectly well that the US nonpayment of UN dues is not related to those traffic tickets but based on the US demand for more influence on UN policy than they already are entitled to based on the UN charta."

Try "A great many US taxpayers aren't happy with the UN in general and would be unhappy with their elected officials if they started paying more money than absolutely necesary."

Re:USA arrogance.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but the US has foxier chicks. (Unlike those European hairballs)

Re:USA arrogance.

[Anonymous Coward]

You want a fair go? Euro-trash had their chance. You couldn't even handle Afganastan(sp!)!!! Fair go? What about the trade imbalance? Why won't you open your markets to more US products? I know why--because your affriad the rest of the Euro-trash lazy asses might realise their your stuff is overly expensive CRAP. Euro-trash coutries get to help their failing industries, but when America tries to do the same thing, you wine like a little two year old. Euro-trash can't even handle modern politics. The British are the only ones who realise something needs to be done with Sadam. The rest of the Euro-trash is trying to hide their ties to terrorism and anti-Isreal actions. Euro-trash messed everything up and America has to clean it up. Euro-trash messed it up by their lack of action. Stop using America as your scapegoat for everything, and do something for once! I am sick and tired of America being the worlds charity, and having the world give America black eyes with comments like...you should do this or you should do that. Shut the F*ck up you Euro-trash peice of sh*t. What's stopping all of the Euro-trash from making the world a better place? Not the US. If you had any balls, you could do it your damn selves!!!! Instead America has to give money to what seems like every damn country because you Euro-trash pieces of sh*t are too cheap and only like funding terrorist countries. Well, if you don't like how America, the only superpower, is handling things we'll take our money, food, troops, and other forms of support back. We'll only use them for maters of national security in regards to US issues,a nd we'll use the money to help our country by providing shelter to our homeless and feeding our hungry. Then we'll close our borders to new immagrants. What will you lazy, good for nothing, Euro-trash people do them? Who will you blame then? It won't be the US because we won't be doing anything, and you'd have to get off of your lazy, good for nothing, Euro-trash asses!!!!
As for the UN, it's a wothless piece of sh*t! Isreal doesn't even have full status yet. It is hammered with people who don't know what to do, and would would rather someone punching them 1000 times and still try for peace--even when that someone knaws off your leg.

Re:USA arrogance.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Well, if you don't like how America, the only superpower, is handling things we'll take our money, food, troops, and other forms of support back."

We will?

I should have guessed by the spelling that it was you, George.

Sir, it behooves you not to formulate new matters of National Policy all by yourself. Just be glad I found out instead of Dick; he would give you a 10 minute time-out in the corner, and would convince the Treasury Secretary to withhold your juice and cookies at Snack Time tomorrow.

You just be good and don't get into any trouble, Sir.

Love,
Colin

P.S. It's past your bedtime, Sir. One glass of water, then off to bed!

P.P.S. No, there are no Iraqis hiding in the closet or under your bed. I double-checked. Go to sleep, Sir.

Re:USA arrogance.

[Anonymous Coward]

Euro-trash can find better ways to make fun of the worlds only super power?!?!?!?!!!!

Empty Victory - Enjoy it while it lasts.

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

Within 10 years, corporate lobbyists will have managed to buy a federal law or two that negates this completely. Or, barring that, at least allows companies to sue former employees into bankruptcy with impunity, which is practically the same thing.

Sorry to shatter everyones jackoff fantasy. Oh, and just to be cruel, I'll add this... the tech corporations aren't against DRM (the customer ultimately pays for it, after all), they're just biding their time until they come up with a DRM strategy that maximizes any profit or royalties that they'd recieve.

anecdotal evidence

[Trepidity]

Take a look at the large number of immigrants to the U.S. Take a look at the large number of foreigners attending college in the U.S. Obviously somebody likes it better than where they came from...

Re:anecdotal evidence

[Grishnakh]

Take a look at the total absence of foreigners from western European countries. Obviously not everyone thinks the US is all that great.

Sure, it's better here than in India, but I'd prefer to live in a country that's competetive with Sweden in standard-of-living.

Re:anecdotal evidence

[Anonymous Coward]

erm, the U.S came bottom in the top ten highest no of immigrants last year, and that is raw numbers not per capita....

Re:anecdotal evidence

[Skjellifetti]

Er, Most Americans have parents/grandparents... from Western Europe. That is very far from a total absence of foreigners from western European countries. You must live a very insular life if you don't know anybody in the States who is an emigre from Western Europe.

I'd prefer to live in a country that's competetive with Sweden in standard-of-living.

Define standard of living. The US has a per capita income that is quite competitive with Sweden. Oh! Maybe you meant "has a high tax rate so the gov't can coddle you from cradle to grave." I think even the Swedes have gotten a bit tired of that.

Re:anecdotal evidence

[Grishnakh]

You must live a very insular life if you don't know anybody in the States who is an emigre from Western Europe.

I know tons of people here from Eastern countries. I don't know anyone here that was born in Western Europe and moved here within the last 10 years (or even 20). Things have changed a lot since the early 1900's when most immigrants came from Europe, in case you haven't noticed.

Define standard of living. The US has a per capita income that is quite competitive with Sweden. Oh! Maybe you meant "has a high tax rate so the gov't can coddle you from cradle to grave." I think even the Swedes have gotten a bit tired of that.

Well things like quality of public education, health care, employment laws, and civil liberties are high on my list since they directly affect my quality of life. Last time I checked, the US was ranked along with 3rd-world countries in public education, the health care system is a mess (especially if you're not rich), employment laws clearly favor companies and corporations (except this new ruling in Calif), and Americans aren't even allowed to read certain source code.

Re:anecdotal evidence

[Skjellifetti]

Things have changed a lot since the early 1900's when most immigrants came from Europe, in case you haven't noticed.

Check your stats. Of the temp workers coming to the US, over 10% were from the UK, 7.5% Canada, and 7.5% from Germany. These are the number 1, 2, and 4 countries (Japan is 3, France 7, and Russia 9). For straight immigration, Mexico swamps all others and the top 10 are all third world. That doesn't tell you that Europeans are not still emmigrating. In fact, 10 years ago, Europeans gov'ts were panicing over the brain drain of European professors seeking higher salaries at US universities.

Well things like quality of public education, health care, employment laws, and civil liberties are high on my list since they directly affect my quality of life. Last time I checked, the US was ranked along with 3rd-world countries in public education, the health care system is a mess (especially if you're not rich), employment laws clearly favor companies and corporations (except this new ruling in Calif), and Americans arn't even allowed to read certain source code.

Most health care systems in most countries are a mess. There is a lengthy waiting list for many surgeries in Canada and the UK for example. Public ed in the US is a local responsibility and quality varies greatly from juristiction to juristiction. Go check the OECD website. Overall US expenditure per capita on public education surpasses most Western European countries as well as Japan. There are differences between math/sci attainment at the 8th grade level, but these are not statistically meaningful. Employment laws? What good does a pro worker law do if you can't get a job? Have you checked the Western European unemployment rates lately? (9.2% Finland, 8.5% France, 8% overall in Europe). Most states in the US have right-to-work laws that are like CAs. And it was Norway that arrested the guy who wrote the DeCSS code.

NCC Agreements are Fascism

[Wierd Willy]

Trade secret law is state law's contribution to intellectual property restrictions, along with federal law governing copyright, patents and trademarks. It is perhaps the most abused area of intellectual property law, but also the least commented on. Its lax standards for establishing a "secret" and the ease by which former employers can obtain injunctions result in scores of lawsuits every year against employees who leave to join a competitor or start a new business. Such lawsuits restrict employees' right to seek the job of their choice. And all too frequently, trade secret law operates to restrict innovation by preventing the dissemination of information that is already in the public domain, trivial, or obvious to anyone knowledgeable in the field.

The point being, "public domain" is what in your head! The human brain is capable of holding HUGE amount of information. When an organization can copyright the things in your mind, and not allow you to use the information you have gathered for yourself to continue to function in a profession, THEN YOU ARE A SLAVE. If a man can (and I have seen several examples of this) hear a song on the radio for the first time, and then go sit at a piano or guitar or violin, and play that song almost flawlessly, he should not expect to hear from the attorney representing the music label that published that song. Same with books or newspapers, a person could theoretically, memorize an article and then recite that article verbatim without fear of legal retribution. What one has inside their head, is there own, exclusively. No human can own another human as property!

Us/them

[tinguru]

individuals

we are all individuals,

at least I think that is a good ideal.

I think that "much of the world would like America's prosperity and much of the world envies it. Well, these are the sorts of things you have to do if you want that prosperity. " -- could rightly be classified "flamebait"

But, anonymous non-USA poster rightly call "crap" as you see it, where in the world do you get off speaking for the rest of the world. pashaw.

no we
no them
only individuals

Re:Us/them

[Best_Username_Ever]

we are all individuals

I'm Not!

Non-compete

[Anonymous Coward]

Many companies ask you to sign a non-compete clause, but they are totally unenforcable. My brother was asked to sign a non-compete contract by his employer stating that he would refrain from contacting anyone he had on his sales list for 24 months in the event he left the company.

Both my mother and I had purchased material from my brother for our respective companies. Does that mean that my brother can not associate with his own family members for a period of 24 months after leaving the company? Try and enforce that one.

Remember if you train for a avocation or trade that is your chosen profession. If someone actively tries to prevent you from practicing that profession, they are engaging in restraint of trade.

I was an IT professional for 7 years before being headhunted by a computer OEM. They asked me to sign a non-compete clause and I did, otherwise I wouldn't have gotten hired. After two years I left the company and started my own consulting firm with the full knowledge of that company. I'm still waiting for them to try to enjoin me from engaging in a profession I was involved in prior to working there. It won't happen, because they know the contract is pure bunk.

Re:Non-compete

[radja]

>Does that mean that my brother can not associate with his own family members for a period of 24 months after leaving the company?

no, it means he cannot actively pursue his family-members as clients for his new employer or company. However.. if those familymembers decide for themselves that they need another supplier, they're free to seek out your brother, as long as your brother does not initiate contact. At least that's how my employer explained it to me...

IANSL (I ain't no steenkin' lawyer)

//rdj

For those whining "it's only in california"...

[janda]

INAL.

Yes, this decision was made in california, and therfore, no it is not automatically binding on the other states, however...

Anybody, anywhere, can now include this judgement as part of their evidence regarding their non-competition lawsuit.

Regardless of how small, all victories help us information workers.

Re:Shut the fuck up, shut the fuck up NOW

[Disevidence]

Even though you were sarcastic, the sad thing is some people actually hold those sort of views.

Re: Rubbish? Not necessarily....

[King_TJ]

IMHO, what *is* rubbish is the elite, "better than thou" attitude of the majority of self-proclaimed "white hat" hackers out there.

I'm not directly employed in "computer security", nor do I really want to be - but I know enough about it to comment on it.

First of all, there's a percentage of these "white hat hackers" that are identical to the "black hats", except they never got caught. They're really no more ethical or trustworthy than any other hacker - but they were smart enough to go where the money was, before they got in legal trouble.

There are also quite a few "white hats" in the industry that know much more about "working the media" to build their desired image than they do about actual hacking and hacking prevention.

I don't deny that the press loves to talk up the "high profile" black-hat hackers as more of a threat than they really are. Perhaps it's par for the course though - as the "white hats" seem to do the same thing for their security businesses and consultancies.

Also IMHO, any company with a well-trained I.T. staff should be able to do a reasonable job of securing their systems without spending money on some "security specialist". Most people in this job role have lots of expensive certifications (Cisco CCIE, etc.) - but when you look at the bottom line, they're just being paid to be the "fall guy" if something gets hacked.

In corporate America, your biggest security issues are co-workers sharing passwords, writing them down so they can remember them, using weak passwords that are easily guessable, never changing passwords (or when forced, rotating between the same 2 or 3 passwords every time), and disgruntled workers taking advantage of the security clearances you gave them so they could do their job to begin with.

The overpaid "security specialist" can sit there all day long and play with firewall configs and new encryption keys for VPN authentication, but 99% of the time, the problems are much more basic.

It's about the time pendulum started swinging back

[symbolic]

I know why a company might want to prevent an employee from seeking alternative gainful employment in their chosen field, but we're talking about a job here, not indentured servitude. The company benefits from the employee's skill and expertise, and while said employee may easily gain experience as they carry out their employment, the employer benefits from this, so in the end, it's a wash.

As for employment contracts, there's such a thing as an unconscionable contract- that is, a contract so one-sided that it grants the other party a significantly unfair advantage. Signed or not, I believe that these can be thrown out if such a condition is deemed to exist. (I'm not an attorney, though, so there may be some detail(s) I've overlooked.)

It's good that this precedent now exists. In a free market, an employee should have every right to pursue whatever (legal) opportunity will help advance his/her career.

Score one for the working man.

[E-Rock-23]

And now for something... Completely different (thank you Monty Python)

A California court just rejected that idea in California.

Moderation: -1(Redundant). If it's a California Court, of course it would reject the idea in California.

And for michael: Moderation: -1(Oversight).

I hate to be overcritical, but damnit, we're supposed to be GEEKS here. We need to show some intellignence.

And yes, I'm willing to take the Karma hit for this statement, so mod away...

Re:Score one for the working man.

[Anonymous Coward]

OK

a) "2: Interesting"? Seriously, it's quite apparent that the straightest path to getting shite modded up is to say "OK, mod away" or "I'm sure I'll be modded into oblivion, but..."

b) Do you know what a geek is? They bite the heads off of living animals in side shows. Geeks need show _no_ intelligence.

c) I have to agree with your post though, the recent rash of reposts and _horrid_ lack of editing are just appalling.

Try to keep in mind, not all americans are morons.

[dextr0us]

All americans aren't morons. Seriously. We really don't believe that IP is so precious that someone can be sued for programming and then using that knowledge again. This is bullshit, no matter if you're red blue purple green (or a california court) Now enough american bashing. Fuck. I'm in favor of global thinking, but not neccessarily the buisness practices that come with it. Try to remember we're all human. I agree with a lot of people in iran, scotland, hell even canada (just a joke people!) and its more global thinking that is going to get us farther. (enter sarcasm) actually now that i think about it, i'd much rather be in a place where no one repsects anyones culture. "fucking americans and your intelectual property laws, you've never done anything right" sounds about right. (/sarcasm) seriously people..... I thought you were people that are more enlightened and less worried about imaginary boundries...... One thing that americans sure are good at is eating. dont forget we're the most obese country in the world, and damn proud too. Also, we have hip-hop, and you betta reckognize how much of a global influence hip-hop music has had. biiiiaatttch

Possibly in banks' business loan terms

[MickLinux]

My brother worked for a US IT company, and they came around with such a horror contract. In the past, my brother simply crosses out the offending parts, and signs it. He then points out that (a) the provisions are illegal by court rules, (b) the company is foolish to be making contracts that are unenforceable, and (c) he would be foolish to sign things that are confusingly unenforceable that he doesn't intend to follow. Essentially, too much confusion is bad for business. The company, the last time, came back by saying that it is required in the terms of their bank loans. My brother, being aware that they are in a financial morass, tends to believe it. It remains very interesting that the banks, not content with seizing the companies, would appear to be attempting to get documents that would seize the workers as slaves, too -- even though the current laws forbid that. I can't help but notice how, in Argentina, the banks were very successful at changing the laws; thus, I tend to think that there may be some kind of a plan in the works. On the good side, the Bible has a ton to say about people who think they can do this and survive their own stupid power mongering. Since I have yet to see the wisdom in the Bible be wrong in the long term, I rather expect that (at best) I don't really understand what is going on, or (at worst) our illustrious banker owners will face the consequences inherent in their decisions. Meanwhile, though, I and my brother will take lousy jobs rather than sign false contracts.

really? in California!?!??!

[cdf12345]

"A California court just rejected that idea in California."

I suppose when California Court starts rejecting ideas in other states I'll pay attention.

There's nothing stopping me...

[Anonymous Coward]

...from going to work for a competitor, except that it would void my stock options with my present company.

Trade secret my ass.

[Performer Guy]

Some trade secret. You realize that this guy is a lock salesman. The big trade secret is his ability to persuade Home Depot et.al. to give his company shelve space in preference to competitors. Reading the decision his ex-Boss sounds like a nightmare. The competition are trying to hire him because of his ovious talent but even his old company say his ex-boss Robert Steinman made disparraging comments about him (this is their Dilbertian attempt to argue the employee was taking revenge). The same bozo threatened to end the guy's career in an exit interview.

The icing on the cake here, the really unbelievable thing here is that one company is a subsidiary of the other from the decision "Sladge is a subsidiary of Ingersoll-Rand", unless this is a typo and "Sladge" should read "Kwikset".

Either I've found an error in the court decision or the world is going insane.

Best move of the whole trial? On disclosure the defendant hands over a bag full of destroyed disks and shredded papers etc.

Re:Trade secret my ass.

[Dun Malg]

Dunno what the decision said, but Schlage is a subsidiary of Ingersoll-Rand. Robert Steinman was "installed" as president when I-R bought the company, and he's essentially running it into the ground. Ever since then Schlage has discontinued many of their locks which were well designed and replaced them with locks full of plastic parts. I guess they're trying to compete with Kwikset, which has always made low-quality locks. Oh well. We live in a Home Depot world now, where price is more important than quality. Kind of a shame. I've seen old-style Schlage locks that are still working fine after 40 years. The new crap they're turning out, I've seen 'em break in under a year.

Different here in the UK

[shilly]

I've been led to believe that in the UK, non-compete clauses are worth bugger all for the simple reason that once you've resigned, you no longer have a contract of employment with your company and it therefore has no power over you. That's why companies use gardening leave if they don't want their trade secrets disappearing -- and why the military and security services get so twitchy about ex-employees threatening to write books.

Re:Different here in the UK

[BigBadBri]

Added to which, it's considered to be 'restraint of trade' under EU law, and hence unenforceable.

Paid-for NDAs can, however be enforced - if you can find something else to do for a year or two, this is sometimes the most profitable strategy.

Re:Different here in the UK

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but the UK also has stupid slander and libel laws.

UK law

[Orangecutter]

Although IANAL, I can tell you that UK law is strongly protective of the employee in such cases. As a principle of anti-slavery you cannot force someone to do anything. In particular, you cannot effectively force them to work for you by blocking them from other companies in their skill area (and so leaving your company as the only option).

To get round this you can draw up contract, agreed/signed by mutual consent, but the principle of a contract involves "consideration". In other words, both parties have to get something out of it. So for example you cannot require someone to avoid competitors unless they get something in return --- e.g. you pay them.

Trade secrets are related. An employee cannot take trade secrets to another employer but they can certainly take any skills they learned. The difference between the two is of course blurred, but the principle is that you cannot be prevented from using skills which are now part of you as distinct from part of the former employer.

It's a state thing

[EmagGeek]

IANAL FWIW, those employment contracts always have something like this: "This agreement shall be governed by the Laws of the State of FUBAR and shall be blah blah blah".... which means to me that if I work for Schlage in California and then go to work for XYZ Lock Company in Nevada, there isn't SQUAT Schlage can do about it... The key here is if you work for a company, and you have a non-compete, and you want to switch jobs, just move to a right-to-work state... But then again, IANAL....

Slight clarifications

[werdna]

Reading the comments, I notice that readers are confusing or conflating various issues -- not terribly, but it may be interesting to understand the various bodies of law applicable here:

1) Trade secret law. This is the body of law that prevents you from using or disclosing certain information disclosed to you, directly or indirectly under certain circumstances amounting to a "confidential relationship." You get nailed either by using or disclosing, or by threatening to do so. Virtually every state has strong TSL. TSL is a species of intellectual property law.

2) Covenants not to compete. This is the body of law governing the enforceability of contract provisions stating that a person promises not to compete with a business entity. State laws vary widely as to enforceability. Some completely prohibit these provisions. Others enforce them skeptically, depending upon their "reasonability." Still others have detailed rules for reasonability as to time and space limitations. Others limit to whether the covenant is necessary to protect a reasonable commercial interest. CNC is a species of antitrust regulation.

3) Inevitable Disclosure Rules. This is the DMCA of trade secret law, and this was the subject of the case here. Various jurisdictions (including, alas, Florida) have taken to the view that enforceable non-compete-like protections can be given, without express covenant, to protect a trade secret when a former employee undertakes a job where the disclosure of the secrets is an inevitable consequence of working there. It is a monster, because it invades and disfigures both trade secret AND covenant policies: ID, like trade secrets, potentially last forever and have no territorial bounds. And ID, like covenants, require no proof of bad intent or misappropriation -- even threatened misappropriation. ID, like DMCA, is neither antitrust nor intellectual property -- it is merely naked technology regulation.

Since covenants and trade secrets, respectively, embody a complex set of balancing issues and policies -- ID, by rejecting those policies, unmoors trade secrets and covenants law from their fundamental justifications, and therefore is as likely to hurt the economy as help it. Like the DMCA, which unmoors copyright law from its fundamental policies, ID risks creation of dangerous rights in gross to a few powerful litigious corporations, with no useful payback to society.

4) "Right to work" law, so far as I know, is simply a euphemism for the proposition that an employer is free to hire or fire any employee on any given day, and cannot be held to contract (union or otherwise) regarding employment on any other basis. Basically, it makes illegal the old union notion of a closed shop. (In this arena, I am no expert, but folks seem to be misusing the term here.) RTW is a species of employment law, slightly akin to a backwards version of antitrust.

Re:Slight clarifications

[cascadingstylesheet]

4) "Right to work" law, so far as I know, is simply a euphemism for the proposition that an employer is free to hire or fire any employee on any given day, and cannot be held to contract (union or otherwise) regarding employment on any other basis. Basically, it makes illegal the old union notion of a closed shop. (In this arena, I am no expert, but folks seem to be misusing the term here.) RTW is a species of employment law, slightly akin to a backwards version of antitrust.

You focus heavily on half of what right-to-work means, and gloss over the other half. Yeah, it would sound pretty bad if only that half existed.

What you mention, but only in passing, is that right-to-work means no closed union shop. You literally have a right to work; to enter into an employment arrangement without being required to join a union. Yes, that means your employer can hire (and fire) you without going through the union as well. Whoop-de-do. If you like the union tradeoff, join one; if not, don't. You're trying to make right-to-work sound like the tool of eeeevil big business, by leaving off the benefit to the employee.

Re:Try to keep in mind, not all americans are moro

[PigleT]

"All americans aren't morons."

I suspect you didn't mean that. Damn' yankees and their "idiomatic", ie illogical and imprecise, approach to the poor innocent English language.

"Also, we have hip-hop, and you betta reckognize how much of a global influence hip-hop music has had."

Yes, I despise every last mangled over-produced note of it.

Oversimplified, perhaps

[Anonymous Coward]

That may be true of sensitive information, but isn't with regard to skills. If you know how to do something, I don't believe they can prevent you from earning a living. (disclaimer, IANAL)

Re:America does not just dole out cash

[Anonymous Coward]

The countries with the highest standard of living are the scandinavian block of countries, Canada and Australia. Unfortunatly we also have the highest tax.

I would not like to live in America because I enjoy living in a free country with free and fair elections where my children will get a GOOD free education, where, if they get sick, they can get GOOD, free health care and where if I loose my job or quit or strike because they are abusing me, I'm not going to die of cold on the street.

At the end of world war two America was BY FAR the richest and most powerfull country on earth. They used this power to structure world financial and political institutions in their favour. One such institution is the UN. (That's why it's based in N.Y. sparky) However the UN is one of America's unruly children. They criticise America for having one of the worst human rights records on Earth. They criticise America for removing DEMOCRATICALLY elected governments from power and replacing them with authoritarian regimes that will put American companies above their own people. (much like the American government)

The International Monetary Fund is a much better behaved child. They encourage little nations to open up their markets and allow their people to be abused by foreign companies. (This is not new. Europe did it before America, and America is CERTAINLY not alone in doing THIS now.) They however know the rules, and know to turn a blind eye as America acts as one of the most protectionistic countries on earth.

The reason that you will not support the international criminal court on human rights, is because your politicians know you have one of the worst human rights records on earth.

The reason you will not support the Kyoto protocol on greenhouse gas emissions, is that it may damage some industries, and those industries own your president.

As a final note, you are not GIVING anyone anything! you are giving away a lot of LOANS. You are using these LOANS as leverage to control the markets of little countries to allow your companies to continue to exploit their people. Britain was repaying it's war debt to the USA for decades. (Just to make sure nobody misunderstands, Britain was on the same side as the USA in WWII.)

I have no problem with American people per say, more with American companies. Generally aside from being money focussed and poorly educated about anything outside your own borders, you have a strong belief in your republic (NOTE: NOT DEMOCRACY) and in many rights and freedoms.

I am Australian. We are far from perfect. Our current Prime Minister, in a few short years, has taken us from being a world leader in social, political and economic issues to being a total pariah behind only America amongst developed countries in its antisocial behaviour. THIS MAKES ME VERY VERY UNHAPPY, because I DO NOT want to live in a shit hole like America, and I DO NOT WANT TO BECOME A SERVICE COUNTRY FOR AMERICAN COMPANIES LIKE SOUTH AMERICA. I wish our Prime Minister would take his tongue out of G. Bush Jr's ring hole, however our politicians are not corrupt, they are just stupid peasants

You are not a force for peace, goodness and justice in the world, and the sooner more Americans wake up and realise that, the sooner you can fix your corrupt political and economic systems and return to being more than just the land of the brave! THAT'S WHY PEOPLE GET ANGRY WHENEVER THERE ARE POSTS ABOUT HOW PERFECT IN EVERY WAY AMERICA IS!

Re: Rubbish? Not necessarily....

[Anonymous Coward]

As Bruce Schneier says, the problem is that most companies have a fundamental misconception of what a security specialist should do. While a CCIE would be nice, it does not imply security competency.

A true security person drives policy, and does not do configurations. At my company we have systems as diverse as HewlettPackPaq Tandems, SAP R/3, Solaris, HP/UX, Linux, Unisys's bastardized version of SVR4 for x86, NY, 2K, Apache web servers, MS IIS, Lotus Notes, Netscape I-Planet, PIX Firewalls, Load balancing switches, and a weird E-Commerce back end known as Broadvision, automatic transport and batch schedulers such as Kintana, Veritas Net-Exec, FTP servers, Exchange Servers, Sendmail servers plus much more.

If you think any company would be willing to hire security expertise for all those systems beyond any competent administrators you would be nuts. A good network admin knows how to configure a firewall, ACL routers, and set up VPN's. A good server admin reads bugtraq for their platform. Systems such as SAP employ their own security people (In SAP they call them security people, but they tend to admin users and ACL resources.) No security person can be the expert in all systems in the company. A good admin is the expert in the system configuration. Only business people truly know how the data should be divided.

A security person understands security concepts and can apply them across platforms. The business communicates how separation of data and rights occurs (after you force them to tell you) and policy gets written. The sysadmins follow the policy. The sysadmins communicate their concerns and you sell it to the business in terms of risk management.

Yes I was a Network Engineer and a Sysadmin, and have extensive socket level programming experience; I have Cisco's CCNP security certification, an MCSE, Solaris Network Admin, Novell CNA 4.11, and am working on a CISSP. But what makes me a good security person is the ability to communicate needs between business and IT, and the ability to enter projects at an early stage to insure that security is a concern.

Security is process and policy. Proper administration is necessary, but that is what your company's sysadmins are for.

Is this subtle humour from an American?

[3Ddgg]

or are you serious, because it sounds to me like your serious.

perhaps I'm being a little harsh. Some of your points are quite valid. People should have the right to what they create. The German model of inalienable copyright for the creator is perhaps the best reflection of this idea in my opinion. I think that the INTERNATIONAL model for patents is significantly more in keeping with their original intention of avoiding an second dark age by targeting trade secrets. (I hope you are familiar with the dark ages as something other than a figure of speech)

The humerous aspect of your post is the suggestion that this intelectual property gig is somehow something unique to the USA. The only thing special about IP law in america is that (as per the usual) it favours your companies over your people. It's nice that America is starting to address this rights issue, but suggesting that it somehow makes the USA special is funny. At least I hope it was supposed to be funny. Otherwise it's just sad.

Non-Competes are not legal in mots states already.

[arglesnaf]

At least Ohio, Illinois, Florida, and Massachussets have never honored non-compete clauses. They require something called "due compensation". I think the concepts is self explanitory. IAALLB (I am a labor lawyers brother)

HEAR HEAR

[3Ddgg]

HEAR HEAR

How do we mod this guy up?

The next guy's good too!

Keyrock not understand...

[BoomerSooner]

Keyrock is confused by your tall buildings and fast moving cars, your spirit TV scares him, but even Keyrock knows working man deserve job, regardless of non-compete agreement.

How ironic

[Anonymous Coward]

In case you hadn't noticed, the US isn't really #1 at anything besides tooting their own horns.

This posted to a website in the US, with the communication using networking protocols developed in the US, from a browser which (based on traffic statistics) was probably written in the US. Your operating system was also probably written in the US (Windows, Apple, FreeBSD) or else is based on a US design (Linux is based on Unix). Much of your software is written in US-created languages (C, Java, Perl, etc, etc). Your computer's physical chip is probably of a US design (Intel, AMD, and Motorola are based in the US).

Yeah, I guess that the US doesn't really produce anything useful or important...

Re:How ironic

[schon]

What I said:

the US isn't really #1 at anything

What you said:

I guess that the US doesn't really produce anything useful or important

So evidently, you think that the only way to produce anything useful or important is to be #1?

It's not irony, it's you not being able to comprehend a simple english sentence.

He didn't sign a non-compete...

[tlambert]

Uh, read the decision before posting.

He didn't sign a non-competition agreement. This was solely a trade secrets case, and it made no decision regarding whether or not non-competition agreements are themselves binding in California.

I can guarantee they are in Minnesota; my cousin worked for a automated controls company that designed small control computers that were then OEM'ed by other companies, such as IBM. e quit to go to work for another company, and was sued by his former employer. He fought it to the apellate court, and lost. However:

o The former employer could only enforce it for one year
o During that year, they had to pay him his salary

They did both.

-- Terry

Re:He didn't sign a non-compete...

[rhombic]

Of course he didn't sign a non-compete; even if he had it wouldn't have made a spit of difference.

The court didn't have to rule on whether non-competes are legal in California; see Walia v. Aetna. The court said that the plantiff was trying to make an after-the-fact non-compete, which would be unenforcable in California.

"Right to work" states have ups and downs

[waferhead]

The cleverly named union busting laws usually known as "Right to Work" do have one upside...

Basically all sources say that any such work restiction clause is unenforcable in Texas.

OTOH, you have to move to Texas...

Re:"Right to work" states have ups and downs

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, Texas needs a steady stream of geeks to counteract the "dumbening" that happens naturally to the residents. We need to keep the average Texan IQ above 60!

Re:Try to keep in mind, not all americans are moro

[dextr0us]

did you think of that one all by yourself? nice try.......

I think you are missing my point.

[tlambert]

I think you are missing my point; that point was that you are going to be hard put to find a technology industry job where you are not required to sign a non-compete agreement as part of the hiring process.

This precedent is meaningless to technology workers in California.

-- Terry

Re:I think you are missing my point.

[rhombic]

I get your point, but it's not meaningless at all. I work in R&D in the biotech industry in California, and deal with trade secrets every day-- my job is to make the damn things. And I didn't sign a non-compete, since my employer doesn't try to spoof people into such things.

Had they asked, I would have gladly signed it-- because in the state of California, blanket non-compete covenents are not enforcable. It's written into state law and has been upheld numerous times in court. If you're a tech worker in California and your company had you sign a non-compete, they spoofed you, unless it's very narrowly and specifically written and has only a negligible impact on your ability to be employed. You can't contract away that right, and you can't be fired or denied employment for refusing to sign a blanket non-compete

What this precedent does is prevent companies from using trade secret law to do an end-run around the state ban on non-competes. Which is very important to California tech workers, since it plugs a hole in the ability to go from job to job.

IANALBMGIIHR (I am not a lawyer but my girlfriend is in human resources). I'd suggest reading Walia v. Aetna for an example of how badly a company can get hit if they take action against somebody in california for not signing a non-compete: $54k in compensatory damages, $125k for emotional distress, and $1 million for punitive damages. Ouch

Again, I'm going to argue applicability...

[tlambert]

Again, I'm going to argue applicability: Walia v. Aetna was about a company which terminated someone who was already an employee for not signing a non-compete agreement.

What I'm talking about is that, unless you sign the non-compete, you don't get hired as software engineer, and you can't argue this fact, if you enter into the contract willingly.

I'm well aware of California law as it applies to right to work, and so on; among other things, it requires that your employer inform you that work done on your own time and equipment belong to you, regardless of what an employment agreement says.

On the other hand, you can contract for your time, and you can contract for pretty much anything, as long as it doesn't try and alienate an inalienable right, and as long as there is consideration exchanged on both sides, it's legal.

Also, note that the enforcement in my cousin's case was conditionalized on the company's continuing to pay my cousin's salary for the period of time the non-compete was in effect, which was court limited to a period of one year.

Such a condition on a non-compete agreement is in fact enforcible, since it gets around the section 16600 problem of robbing someone of their livelihood: by paying them their salary during the enforcement period, there is no loss of livelihood resulting from the enforcement. This is what's at issue in section 16600, the interpretation of which, in this case, is contingent on the "mobility/betterment" clause, operating in the absence of payment for the contract period.

Finally, the "narrow restraint" exception is applicable for an industry segment definition which is small enough; the Walia case was a general restriction, which is not something which normally occurs in, e.g., software engineering non-compete agreements.

-- Terry

no foxes guarding the chicken coop

[phriedom]

"That basically said that the FBI wants hackers, but their ethical screening keeps them from hiring people who think like hackers."

You completely ignored the FBI response. "Hackers" can get a job with the FBI. They have lots of contractors. But if one has done significant illegal stuff, then one can't be a Special Agent. That seems like a really good policy to me. And I think the idea that one must be a criminial to understand the criminal mind is totally bogus.

Re: Rubbish? Not necessarily....

[Anonymous Coward]

"First of all, there's a percentage of these "white hat hackers" that are identical to the "black hats", except they never got caught. They're really no more ethical or trustworthy than any other hacker - but they were smart enough to go where the money was, before they got in legal trouble."

Never fear; I is here!

:-)

Re:Non-Competes are not legal in mots states alrea

[Anonymous Coward]

That's just wrong. Massachusetts certainly can enforce noncompetes, although they do have a mixed record on enforcement on one hand, and overruling the noncompete in others. It does appear to be strongly in the luck of the draw in which judge you get.

I'm not related to a lawyer, though I did hire one when my old Massachusetts company sued me. They didn't want to keep me from working (that's illegal), but they did want me to not work in the field that was my primary area of expertise (i.e., I could wait tables). They also threatened to take my house. These are serious issues, and only California seems to be on the right sides of things in the States.

Anyway, 3 cheers to the CA courts.

Evidence

[3Ddgg]

Skjellifetti

Thank you for providing evidence to demonstrate how wrong you are. The fact that "Temporary Workers, FY 1996:", "Lowest Pct. Naturalized:" and "Immigration, 1820-1996:" were the only sections where Western Europeans featured strongly. The UK featured in many places and in your arguement, but they are quite note worthy for their absolute abuse of their health, education and wellfare systems under Ms. Thatcher. She was possibly more destructive than her contemporary Mr. Regan.

You mentioned unemployment levels. I don't accept jobs below a living wage as fully employed. Unemployed people in western Europe are not going to die of hunger. Their children will be educated. They and their families will get medical attention when they get sick, and when their children graduate from university, they can go and get a better job than their parents could have had.

I am Australian. We don't earn as much in absolute value. We pay much more tax if we aren't company owners and finding investment capital is a bitch. On the other hand, our standard of living is much better in most areas in real terms.

Oh, people also go to the USA on holiday, so they know what they are not choosing. Maybe you should do the same.

Re:Evidence

[Skjellifetti]

Thank you for providing evidence to demonstrate how wrong you are.

Er, I think you missed the point of those stats entirely. Emmigration from West Europe to the US is still going strong. Sure, it is less relative to other (mostly less developed) countries, but it has far from dried up completely. More West Europeans move to the US to live and work (e.g. Linus Torvalds) than go in the opposite direction. Between 10 and 20% of the West European immigrants will choose to become citizens of the US. It is rare for a US citizen to move abroad and become a citizen of another country.

Oh, people also go to the USA on holiday, so they know what they are not choosing. Maybe you should do the same.

I have traveled extensively (Europe, South America, South and SE Asia) and worked for a year in India. I, too, know what I am not choosing.

As for Australia:

• Australia Taps More Phones Than Entire U.S.
• Australia's Censored URL List Remains Hidden
• Australia Plans More Spying on Citizens
• Oz Government Seizes Games For "Full Classification"
• A Social Health Atlas of Australia
• Racism in Australia
• Statistics: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
• Asylum Seekers in Australia

The US is far from perfect, but what irritates me about these "[West Europe, Oz, NZ, CA, etc] is better than the US" diatribes is that they usually ignore the fact that these places themselves often have an ugly side. Who was it who said "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone?" West Europe, Oz, NZ, CA, and, yes, the US are all pretty good places to live and work. Each has their own unique advantages and disadvantages and none is really any better than another.

Re:Evidence

[3Ddgg]

West Europe, Oz, NZ, CA, and, yes, the US are all pretty good places to live and work. Each has their own unique advantages and disadvantages and none is really any better than another.

Thank you. I ask you to note that these antiUS diatribes, as you put it, come in response to one of two things:

1. a statement explaining why the USA is the best country on earth, the land of the free, the home of the brave (I'll give you that one), the worlds police force (rather than their greatest theives), and just the hottest shit that everyone wants to be

or

2. a statement/news article that blatantly ignores the existence of a world outside the USA.

The next time you see a string of these diatribes, look to the statement that trigered them and try to understand that these people are trying to change the world view of an ignorant hick.

p.s. Yes Aussie police / ASIO are not our best & finest or most competent. I don't approve of child pornography either, Yes, there are reasons from our past as to why we won't ratify the genocide conventions, yes we have racist ignorant fucks too (our PM is a sterling example), and yes we favour people who seek refugee status legitimately instead of trying to jump the que. By the way, the incidence of health problems by socio-economic group is more to do with lifestyle, and less to do with our public health system, (which is getting weaker as our fucking idiot of a P.M. makes our health system more and more like yours (without all the bribes your pollies get)). I fully recognise that our present government has taken us from being world leaders in most socio/politico/environmental agenda to being near the bottom, second only to your great nation.

p.p.s. What's your point? Do you seriously want a list of references finding negative points of the USA's existence in the world? Maybe a CD would be more practicle than a post.

Re:Evidence

[Skjellifetti]

They are just as often started by:

1. Ignorant hicks from outside the US whose sole source of information about the rest of the world is a Rupert Murdoch publication.

or

2. Left wing snobs from outside the US who dump on us just because it is fashionable but who can't be bothered to see if their comparisons and criticisms have any basis in fact.

My point? Fix your own fucking problems before pointing fingers at others! We take in nearly a million people each year who seem to think that we have something better to offer than wherever they were born (Fact: a lot of those people are from Western Europe, Oz, NZ, and CA).

Re:Evidence

[3Ddgg]

It's a bit hard to get anything from Murdoch or Packer here in Japan. I wish I could say I was disapointed. I will grant that many of the rants around are not so well informed. This occurs on both sides.

Many of the criticisms come from referied work originating inside the USA about countries where their own problems are the USA. South America is an interesting case in point.

My first point was simply that your evidence did not support the claims in your post as well as they did the opinions of the person you sought to bag.

MY second point was that you shouldn't be pointing fingers at anyone (arguably not even Iraq (there's a little bait for your next post)).

Have a happy and stress free day. :-) :-) :-)

Re:Evidence

[Skjellifetti]

My first point was simply that your evidence did not support the claims in your post as well as they did the opinions of the person you sought to bag.

I had a good course in human population analysis in grad school so I thought the evidence fit my point well. On the other hand, I also learned in grad school that one should always have someone else review one's own work since what the author thinks might be an obvious point may be obscure to the reader.

Careful what you say about South America. My 1st university degree was a double major in Economics and Latin American Studies with a minor in Meso-American Anthropology. While the US has certainly done some amoral things there, most of their troubles are due to Spanish colonial legacies and their own bad economic policies.

As to Iraq, I'm in a quandry. I am what passes for a liberal in the US these days (pro choice, prefer more environmental cleanup, pro gun control, want a better health care system, etc.) but I am getting more libertarian since the gov't too often mucks up the implementation. I used to abhore the right wing, flag waving God is on our side exclusively crowd (OK, for the most part I still do). But Sept 11 caused a sea change in the US. It well and truly pissed off just about everyone here. Even long-haired loonies like myself have US flags flying on their front porches. Sadam clearly has to go. Leaving him to stay and abuse his own people, let alone the rest of the world, is a lot worse choice than going in with an army and hanging him from the nearest lampost. But we have to do it through the UN. They'll eventually come around. It took them forever to get around to pressuring the Indonesians on E. Timor, the Croats and Serbs in Bosnia, etc. But enough US pressure and they will do something. Clinton was far better at building coalitions against petty tyrants than W ever will be and I don't hold out a lot of hope that W will ever understand why multilateral action is the way to go.

Stress free day? Gawd, I wish. But thanks for the thought. I started my own company a year ago It is on a knife edge of ruin or riches at the moment.

Re:South America

[3Ddgg]

His OPINION was that the number of people coming to America from western Europe appeared to have DECREASED markedly as of late. I fail to see how this is not supported by those figures. Please enlighten me.

Re: South America, yes they were shafted by an old, barbaric, imperialistic, European colonial power. Many of these economic policies (where they opened their markets in accordance with the Washington Concensus (This is probably what you studied in economics)) has not helped them to improve the lifestyle of the general populace.

The propensity of the US government, to remove democratically elected governments that favour the interests of their own people, and replace them with authoritarian governments that favour the ability of American companies to strip profits from their countries as efficiently as possible, does not assist the South American continent in developing themselves. Perhaps manifest destiny is still running strong and true in US internal policy :-)

Yeah, Iraq. I was being a little playful with that one. It's a shame you didn't go for the bait. On the one hand, the motivation of Mr Bush (The oil industry sell out you have for a president) is questionable, (the Russians have made it pretty clear that if your guys move in, wack up a new _.gov & grab the oil, they will be pretty pissed, as they have pretty strong debt based claims in the region. Next in line is probably the French, as I understand it.) On the other hand, you guys helped make Saddam, maybe you should help fix him too.:-)

Good luck with your Co.

Re:South America

[Skjellifetti]

Actually he started the whole mess by saying: Take a look at the total absence of foreigners from western European countries. Obviously not everyone thinks the US is all that great. My point (and the figures prove this) is that there is still a lot of immigration from Western Europe to the US. Yes, it has decreased markedly since 1900. But the relative opportunities have improved markedly in Western Europe, too, since 1900. And especially since the end of WWII. But there are still well in excess of 100,000 people moving here each year from Western Europe. That's roughly the equlivalent of 0.5% of Australia's total population to put some perspective on the numbers.

Re: South America, yes they were shafted by an old, barbaric, imperialistic, European colonial power. Many of these economic policies (where they opened their markets in accordance with the Washington Concensus (This is probably what you studied in economics)) has not helped them to improve the lifestyle of the general populace.

Nope, the short story is that after WWII, South America bit into an economic policy that encouraged self-reliance and gov't planning rather than trade and decentralised markets. The policy is known as import substitution (India tried this, too, as did many other developing nations). One of its chief proponents was CEPAL (The UN Economic Commision for Latin America). The result was disastrous compared with countries that went for the export-led development approach (e.g.Taiwan, S. Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, etc. Note that these countries started with far less natural endowment than LA and are nearly in the developed category today). Much of the problem with import substitution is that smaller countries simply don't have the markets to reach economies of scale in many industries. So the locals wind up paying high prices compared to world market prices. Argentina, for example, has a wonderful climate for producing beef and grain. What did they do? They charged high export tarrifs on agriculture to fund their import substitution program. It almost killed the agriculture industry and the industries that were funded were mostly high-priced failures. When they finally dumped the tariff, they got caught up in the supply glut caused by US/European/Aussie/Canadian ag production and export subsidies. South America also borrowed heavily to pay for the new industries. The result was a huge debt burden and very high inflation. Things came to a head in the 1980s (the "Lost Decade"). By 1986, 3/4s of LA countries had inflation rates above 30%. Only in the last 10 years or so have they switched over to market economies and open trade. The result is that most (maybe all except Columbia) are now Democracies and have resumed some growth. I was in Mexico recently and it is clearly back on a growth path. Are the market reforms a success? Too soon to tell. Any time you take a country from isolated to open and from central to market economy, there will be both winners and losers. And no, the losers are often not the small fry who can often quickly adapt by creating micro-industries and will benefit from the price reductions on the goods they buy that open trade brings.

For Iraq, I fear that the cure will be worse than the disease. Lets see, we got: Bush (Not too bright), Condi Rice (couldn't keep her fucking mouth shut and said we didn't like the democratically elected guy when Venezuala had their near coup recently. Stupid bitch. We spent 30 years trying to get LA to respect the outcome of elections and overcome the shame of what we did in Chile to have her undo it in 2 sentences.), Powell (Helped run the US war in Nicaragua. I've seen footage of him praising the El Salvador generals who ran the 1980s death squads), Rumsfeld and Cheny (didn't take down Sadam 10 years ago since that might have meant a democratic gov't in Iraq and we couldn't piss off the Saudis, now, could we?).

Re:South America

[3Ddgg]

Actually he started the whole mess by saying: Take a look at the total absence of foreigners from western European countries.

Oh, I see. This comment must have been edited by my bullshit exageration auto-filter. I consciously joined the string a little later with his perception that he didn't know anyone who had moved from Western Europe recently. This is not such a strong statement of fact.

Washington stablised returns on investment for US companies in South (not latin) American countries long before the 1980s. After WWII, the USA found itself in by far the most dominant economic possition of any country (some say in history). You then shaped world economic and political structures in your favour, did you not? (Interesting asside: have a listen to Eisenhower's fairwell address. What a guy)

I would put it to you that India's economy and industries were destroyed by GB long before they had the ability to form independent policy. Hasn't the "UNITED" states of "AMERICA" had a similarly imperial approach to 'free trade' as the British Empire as of late my "AMERICAN" compadre?

Australia is also not unknown for trade tarrifs, but America is and has been one of the most protectionistic countries on earth in any industry where you are not going to K.O. all comers, most notably during the Regan administration! You have been K.O.ing South American industries for more than ten or twenty years. Why DID they TRY to protect growing markets? Yeah it didn't work for them, but it worked quite well for your aeronautical and computing industries. The Asian miracle didn't come from open markets either. ARGUEABLY the East Asian economic CRISIS was contributed to BY openning markets (and your IMF).

South American industry has a hard time surviving long enough to develop economies of scale. I guess that's what comes from living next to a 'shining city on a hill':-)

p.s. They also lacked East Asian and North American business accumen.

p.p.s. Yeah, It's a little concerning when the hawks are the voice of restraint in an administration. Rumsfeld is the guy who freaks me out. He should be committed along with our foreign minister. If you want a good laugh, look into the life of the Honourable Minister for Foreign Affairs, Alexander Downer. The name says it all!