Comments on: Non-Compete Agreements and the Abyss

By: Karrie

Karrie — Wed, 20 May 2009 00:47:47 +0000

Interesting read.
I am just beginning my court appearances for a non-compete.
I’m not sure how it will play out – seems it goes 50/50 in most cases. I’m sure that mine will not go in my favor. . .why would it be okay to have a job in this economy!?!?!

By: Susan

Susan — Mon, 11 May 2009 19:14:02 +0000

Very satisfying read–column and posts. I linked to your page for an upcoming article on Examiner.com (I’m the Portland OR Unemployment Examiner). I’m writing a series about abusive recruiting practices and I’m delving into this topic for the first time. Non-competes are persuading people that they “have” to be unemployed because their contracts say so.

By: CloudDroplets #22 - Get Smart, It only Took 50 Years | IT Management and Cloud Blog

Thu, 11 Dec 2008 15:18:56 +0000

[...] When I write the Book [...]

By: IBM v Apple - The Ironic Twist | IT Management and Cloud Blog

IBM v Apple - The Ironic Twist | IT Management and Cloud Blog — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 10:18:14 +0000

[...] Non-Compete Agreements and the Abyss [...]

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 23:05:26 +0000

should be “employer” not “lawyer” inthe first line, sorry

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 23:04:46 +0000

I just spent 3 months in court because my former lawyer sued me over a non-compete signed 16 years ago. The law was on our side, but in the end we had to settle because we ran out of money and couldn’t afford the trial. Plus my new employer got cold feet over interference claims.

Large companies are basically free to write overbroad non-competes because they know that 99% of the time the employee can’t afford his defense. the legal term for this is “in-terrorum” quite literally legal terrorism. That is why I feel there needs to be a national non-compete statute. It would require salary to be paid for the duration of the non-compete.

By: Robert

Robert — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 15:35:08 +0000

I’d say it was useful, rather than merely interesting

By: IBM v Apple in the Law-o-Sphere | IT Management and Cloud Blog

IBM v Apple in the Law-o-Sphere | IT Management and Cloud Blog — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 13:45:32 +0000

[...] clueless about the law. Furthermore, there are quite a few technologist who have been drinking the “non-competes” are not enforceable Kool-Aid. I can’t tell you the amount of times I have heard [...]

By: John

John — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:57:56 +0000

“to which Contractor has delivered services on behalf of XYZ corporatopn hereunder,”

Prior to that addition the contract said that any company that they do business with was a company I couldn’t do business with for a year. My one sentence flipped it. The key point is you want to turn vague into specific whenever possible. That particular deal was a 6 week sub contract deal through the XYZ company. I had not worked with this new customer prior to XYZ introducing me to them. That brings up one more point. Contracts have to be fair on both sides.

Anyway…

By: John

John — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:23:32 +0000

Busted… I was being lazy. First I have to remember the vendors name, then I have to find the doc. However, since you were kind enough to read my post I will dig it out. By the way if you or anyone else find this kind of stuff interesting I can dig out some other gems. Reviewing contracts is actually a hobby of mine these days.

John