Legal Arguments Can Hurt Tech Job Mobility 255
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."
Maybe Google gets the short end of this stick (Score:5, Informative)
Which is worse?
1. Reading over competitor's job offers using company equipment? Or
2. forgetting to empty recycle bin and wiping disk before returning company computer?
Re:I beg your pardon? (Score:3, Informative)
"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"
It means that one Lee is in a new job, he can't always prevent himself from disclosing Microsoft trade secrets.
"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."
Lee would be tempted to disclose Microsoft's trade secrets because Google is competing in an area where Microsoft holds trade secrets and is likely to have disclosed them to Lee.
Re:Whats good for the goose (Score:5, Informative)
And don't forget hiring the DEC VMS team to build NT....
Personally I don't think this will be such an issue. Courts have historically been reasonable about things like no-compete clauses and tended to try to protect employees from overextensions of these things.
Secondly, we live in a country where a person can sue another person for any reason. If a distinct claim is made according to law, it will become a matter for the trial. If not, it will be dismissed. If it goes to trial and there are sufficient disputed facts, it goes to a jury trial. If not, it usually ends up in summary judgement procedings (which are cheaper and more predictable than jury trials).
IANAL, and this is just my lay understanding. So don't believe anything I say
Not under California law (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Maybe Google gets the short end of this stick (Score:3, Informative)