Slashdot Mirror
Judge Clears the Way for Google's Microsoft Hire
MarkEst1973 was one of the first to write to tell us MSNBC is reporting that a Judge has cleared the way for Google to hire former Microsoft employee Kai-Fu Lee. The hire does come with several limitations and Lee was also found to have 'misled his former employer and taken advantage of confidential Microsoft information'. This comes as a follow up to the original story in which Microsoft sued Google in order to prevent the hire. Tom Burt was quoted as saying that "Dr. Lee is going to be the highest-paid HR manager ever."
What is the strategic importance of an HR manager to a company like Google? I'm not dissing HR managers, I just don't really understand how they fit into the picture, and what one can do for a company.
The judge enjoined Lee and his new employer from working on any product or service that relies on confidential information tied to search, natural language processing and speech recognition he obtained while working for Microsoft.
Wasn't the noncompetive clause only good for a year?
Maybe you didn't RTFA:
At the same time, King County Superior Court Judge Steven Gonzalez found that former Microsoft (MSFT.O: Quote, Profile, Research) vice president Kai-Fu Lee had misled his former employer and taken advantage of confidential Microsoft information when first working at Google.
All's not good for Mr. Lee.
-everphilski-
Thought the name sounded familiar - here's my copy of Innovation-Cubed, Silicon Graphics magazine, from 1997 presenting "Dr. Kai-Fu Lee and the future of the 3D Web". The mag also had some neat 3D glasses and photos from the mars sojourner rover.
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
California Business and Professions Code Section 16600 covers it succinctly:
Except as provided in this chapter, every contract by which anyone is restrained from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind is to that extent void.
The exceptions it discusses generally apply to business owners. In plain terms, the California courts have found that as long as trade secrets are not misappropriated, an employee can almost never be blocked from working for a competitor in the same field.
When I began working for my current employer, I stated up front that I knew about Section 16600, and that the non-compete section was invalid in the state. The HR person said she knew, and that this was standard boiler-plate since the company was in another state. I followed up on this and on Labor Code Section 2870 (which prohibits a requirement of assigning rights in cases of "an invention that the employee developed entirely on his or her own time without using the employer's equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information" except where it relates to or originates in work done for the company); documentation acknowledging it was placed into my personnel file.
I did this because I do occasionally write code snippets that have nothing to do with my job (I'm a network engineer, not a programmer), are not produced at or for work, and never worked on using company assets. Just covering myself. It's good to be aware of the law and one's rights.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
They hired him for important work expanding their market into China and hamstrung him in his ideas and proposals.
This is why I'm not worried about MS dominating the industry in the long term. A company just can't get that big without becoming hidebound. Ballmer is not the kind of leader that a technology company needs.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
I worked for an advertising company for several months, to qualify my statements. The exact job of marketing firms and advertising companies is to make you care about whatever the company has to say. This is best done if you don't realize it's happening. Failing all that, cram it down your throat anyway (this is what the advertising people call "brand recognition"; it's a polite way of saying "every time you need soap, you've seen so many of our commercials, you pick up our bar.")
They are obviously just a release of information intended as a starting point for the press
These days, it's the point for the press.
I stand by my original statement- the "google blog" looks exactly like a press release page on a website. It's a listing of stuff about the company, all of it PR. "Our baby was saved by google!" "Here are some features we're excited about!"
Spend a few months working for an advertising firm. See every day emails floating into your inbox from executives bragging about successful "placement" campaigns with the press. See your company hawk the most incredible crap like it was the best thing since sliced bread. Feel your skin crawl- and realize that PR and marketing people are in the business of LYING . We'll see how skeptical you are of anything a corporation publishes...
Please help metamoderate.
A judge on Tuesday cleared the way for Google Inc. to hire a former Microsoft executive to head its Chinese research and development center so long as the employee does not recruit from Microsoft. [...] Lee can begin working for Google (Research) by setting up a research office in China and recruiting software engineers if he does not use confidential information gleaned while he worked at Microsoft, the judge found.
I have worked at two places that got raided by Microsoft for employees. Just about every month, some other important employee disappeared to Microsoft, sometimes in groups of two or three, and then those people would call their buddies and the next month even more would disappear. It was horrible for morale and it was horrible for projects. And of course these people were working on the same things at Microsoft that they had been working on before.
And historically, many of Microsoft's major products were created by hiring away key employees from competitors and then having them build exactly the same product for Microsoft that they had been building before.
This lawsuit is a complete joke, coming from Microsoft. The judge should have told Microsoft to stuff it.
That line is just MSFT spin. They wanted to KEEP google from being able to use him in any role. MSFT lost.
As it stands, Kung Fu gets to open a shop in China, and every comp sci in China will be sending him their resume.
He's not allowed to use his skills learned at MSFT. The man has a long career from Apple and other places before he worked at MSFT. The burden is on MSFT to show he is violating his contract.
And it's only until the trial is over.
And MSFT is no angel. Anyone remember the Dead Borland Society? From the late 90's when MSFT held a "technology expo" next to Borland and offered all their top people several multiples of their Borland salaries to come to the dark side? Brain draining is illegal under california law.
That little stunt cost MSFT an "undisclosed sum of money" paid out to Borland. Settled out of court, naturally (no public record).
Anders Heljsborg (spelling?) got paid something like $6 million dollars and also a huge golden parachute to go over and architect visual studio.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.