CA Court Favors Employees in Trade Secret Decision
Posted by
michael
on from the sanity-prevails dept.
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."
Re:People Laid off from my company
by
mc6809e
·
· Score: 2, Troll
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.
Slashdot Mirror
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.