Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Legal Arguments Can Hurt Tech Job Mobility

Posted by Zonk on from the don't-go dept.

camelcai writes "Microsoft's suit against Kai-Fu Lee and Google is based off of the thought that in some circumstances people can't avoid sharing or relying on trade secrets from their former employer when moving to a competitor. In MS's filing it says: 'Lee's conduct threatens to disclose or Lee inevitably will disclose Microsoft's trade secrets to Google and/or others for his and/or Google's financial gain in the course of working to improve Google search products that compete with Microsoft, and in the course of establishing and building Google's presence in China to compete with Microsoft's efforts in China.' According to CNET, thanks to this increasingly popular legal argument, defectors might face a lawsuit even if they did not sign agreements not to compete or not to disclose confidential information."

5 of 255 comments (clear)

  1. The new serfdom by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Insightful


    It's an easy way for a company to pwn its employees.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:The new serfdom by mr+i+want+to+go+home · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I was going to say essentially the same thing - it's not America doesn't practice capitalism, or democracy. The only game in town now is Feudalism.

      It doesn't help that you might own or be paid stocks in a company - the miniscule amount or power you have compared to the largest shareholders doesn't translate to ownership at all. It's like the serf 'owning' his plot - sure, in a literal sense, he owns it. But he can't sell it, can't sell his produce to anyone else, and he sure can't move anywhere else. His whole life belongs to the Feudal lord, 21C, aka, Microsoft/etal.

      I'm truly not trying to start a flame war, or be a troll, and I'm not the only one to think this. Kim Stanley Robertson paints a similar picture in the Mars trilogy. It's worth the read just to see a future vision of politics.

      Scarey stuff.

  2. Don't work for companies like Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is why people should not work for companies like Microsoft. If you think they screw with their customers, imagine how they treat their own employees.

  3. Re:Simple solution. by mrchaotica · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You don't get it, do you? This is voluntary for the company. They can choose to do this, or they can just let the guy work for the other company.

    It's not "the employee demanding pay for no work," it's the employer demanding no work and the employee demanding not to starve to death!

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  4. Re:Maybe Google gets the short end of this stick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Their argument is infuriating. Companies cannot be allowed to have that kind of power over individuals. That's like telling Randy Moss he has to play defence (or perhaps he can't play at all) in oakland because he played offence in minnesota. If you want to block Kai-Fu Lee from working for google, you should have to pay Lee an inconvenience fee for that veto because it isn't like Lee is the only person who wants to work for google. If you are going to block someone from taking one of the most sought after jobs in the IT world, you have to show Lee the money as compensation.

    Did everyone hear that? Show Lee the money!!!

    saltyDOTpeteATslackcrewDOTCOM