Legal Arguments Can Hurt Tech Job Mobility

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."

Re:HURRICANE KATRINA IS ABOUT TO SLAUGHTER 1000'S!

[Draconix]

And you can't spell 'slaughter' without laughter!

Re:I beg your pardon?

[wbren]

'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.'

Can someone translate this please?

Translation: All Your Base Are Belong To Us, Kai-Fu Lee.

Re:I beg your pardon?

[Anonymous Coward]

La conduite de la lie menace de révéler ou la lie inévitablement révélera les secrets commerciaux de Microsoft à Google et/ou à d'autres pour le sien et/ou le gain financier de Google au cours de travailler pour améliorer les produits de recherche de Google qui concurrencent Microsoft, et au cours d'établir et d'établir la présence de Google en Chine pour concurrencer les efforts de Microsoft en Chine.

The worst....

[Karma_fucker_sucker]

leaving pr0n on your machine! Oops!

laid off workers?

[Jeremy Erwin]

In today's modern industrial society, corporations have the freedom to restructure their corporate operations unfettered by such obsolete, quaint notions as labor unions or national borders. But can today's lean, muscular engines of economic opportunity lay off workers with the assurance that their trade secrets will be protected? Will HR consultants be able to utilize the synergistic interplay between noncompete clauses and pink slips? Or will meddling nation-states intervene, citing old-fashioned notions of "justice"?

Re:I beg your pardon?

[Mr2cents]

Daddy, evil google stole my scientist!

Dr. Lee's Worst Crime

[Nom du Keyboard]

Having the Google Toolbar installed on his Microsoft Internet Explorer.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

MS wanting it both ways (no surprise)

[sillivalley]

Of course if you deal with M$ and look at their confidentiality/nondisclosure agreements, they specifically reserve residual rights -- so they're complaining about an ex-employee possibly doing what they explicitly say they're going to do to others.

Big surprise.

Re:The new serfdom

[redKrane]

But who cares if the guild system rules so long as your guild runs MC every week. Am I right, or am i right?

Re:The new serfdom

[No Such Agency]

...it is more difficult as an employer to coerce their wives into trading sex for their husband's privilege of keeping his job.

Screw that, under the New Feudal system they can bring back the "droit de siegneur" - the CEO gets to have sex with your new spouse on your wedding night.

Easier to litigate than innovate?

[henrynemo]

It seems Microsoft is taking what it sees as a path of least resistance [blogspot.com]: claim that Lee's departure for Google inherently prone to trade secret disclosure and hope that this stands on its own.

Wasn't it a short while ago [blogspot.com] that Microsoft, facing a lot of anti-trust litigation, was trying to argue its way out of a lot of legal problems with the DOJ, involving competition with smaller companies that it was steamrollering or strong-arming? Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it hardly seems balanced.

Recent preliminary glimpses into Microsoft's Start project and Google's entrace into the IM and desktop app scene show that they are starting to crowd into the same desktop search portal market.

I think the broad language of above claim demonstrates that Microsoft would seek to prevent Kai-Fu Lee from joining Google even if his R&D projects have nothing to do with those he managed in Redmond. Such an outcome would set a pretty poor example for the IT industry [blogspot.com]. There should not be a waiting period for starting a new facility if no direct tech transfer can be proven. I agree with the poster who noted that what's in researchers heads (and this includes rapport with a foreign market) really belongs to them.

So why doesn't MS take orgainzed crime approach?

[JoeCommodore]

It sounds to me like Microsoft would just prefer to cap the guy then have him work for some other 'organization'.

I don't care how much you may legally justify it, the guy is his own person and should have the right to do and think as he does, Unless he commits some sort of (illegal) violence, I don't think it's any of their business.

If it was such an important issue, they maybe sould not trust such informatin to mere mortals and just load it in to some VB script to keep the info safe.

Look, we are talking people here, the companies are not looking at that fact, only the potential effect it might have on thier stocks.

I for one...

[idontgno]

welcome our noncompete nondisclosure overlords.

Looks like corporate management has found a new Fugitve Slave Law [wikipedia.org] to ensure that the full power of the State and its courts enforce their ownership of their human property.

Sigh. Is it this bad in other countries, or is it just the nation formerly known as the United States of America?