Comments on: How to Prevent iPod Technology Falling into the Wrong Hands http://blog.jparkhill.com/2008/11/06/how-to-prevent-ipod-technology-falling-into-the-wrong-hands/ Business and Legal Notes, mostly Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:12:39 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Civil Procedure http://blog.jparkhill.com/2008/11/06/how-to-prevent-ipod-technology-falling-into-the-wrong-hands/comment-page-1/#comment-5655 Civil Procedure Tue, 28 Apr 2009 05:47:29 +0000 http://blog.jparkhill.com/?p=297#comment-5655 I simply can't understand how business goes. We fight for human rights, but at the same time we create laws that don't respect human rights. For example, you have an opened business and you can fire people as you please because there is an "ecnomical global crisis". What will the human beings that you have fired do? Find another job when nobody is hiring? Right... I simply can't understand how business goes. We fight for human rights, but at the same time we create laws that don't respect human rights. For example, you have an opened business and you can fire people as you please because there is an “ecnomical global crisis”. What will the human beings that you have fired do? Find another job when nobody is hiring? Right…

]]> By: Ecommerce Web Design http://blog.jparkhill.com/2008/11/06/how-to-prevent-ipod-technology-falling-into-the-wrong-hands/comment-page-1/#comment-5651 Ecommerce Web Design Thu, 23 Apr 2009 16:04:05 +0000 http://blog.jparkhill.com/?p=297#comment-5651 The point here is that the burden fell on Apple as the employer to protect its competitive advantage without cutting off Fadell’s ability to make a living.Apple had to figure out how much it was worth to keep Fadell on the sidelines. VB reports that value is $300,000 per year through March, 2010 plus stock worth $7.6M at today’s prices. The point here is that the burden fell on Apple as the employer to protect its competitive advantage without cutting off Fadell’s ability to make a living.Apple had to figure out how much it was worth to keep Fadell on the sidelines. VB reports that value is $300,000 per year through March, 2010 plus stock worth $7.6M at today’s prices.

]]> By: williyamb http://blog.jparkhill.com/2008/11/06/how-to-prevent-ipod-technology-falling-into-the-wrong-hands/comment-page-1/#comment-5650 williyamb Thu, 23 Apr 2009 16:02:02 +0000 http://blog.jparkhill.com/?p=297#comment-5650 Apple could simply tell him he could not go to work for a competitor. Fadell’s expertise is in developing portable audio/video players, so this might make him choose between not working at all for a period of time and trying to break into an entirely new area. Since Fadell is in California, Apple can’t do that. Apple could simply tell him he could not go to work for a competitor. Fadell’s expertise is in developing portable audio/video players, so this might make him choose between not working at all for a period of time and trying to break into an entirely new area. Since Fadell is in California, Apple can’t do that.

]]> By: Apple vs IBM and the non-compete clause « Alliance for Open Competition http://blog.jparkhill.com/2008/11/06/how-to-prevent-ipod-technology-falling-into-the-wrong-hands/comment-page-1/#comment-5551 Apple vs IBM and the non-compete clause « Alliance for Open Competition Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:33:44 +0000 http://blog.jparkhill.com/?p=297#comment-5551 [...] IBM lawsuit and compares it with how Apple is keeping one its stars from going to the competition. Jay’s key point: “If Fadell worked in Massachusetts, New York or most other US states, Apple could simply tell him [...] [...] IBM lawsuit and compares it with how Apple is keeping one its stars from going to the competition. Jay’s key point: “If Fadell worked in Massachusetts, New York or most other US states, Apple could simply tell him [...]

]]> By: Jay Parkhill http://blog.jparkhill.com/2008/11/06/how-to-prevent-ipod-technology-falling-into-the-wrong-hands/comment-page-1/#comment-5546 Jay Parkhill Fri, 07 Nov 2008 17:36:55 +0000 http://blog.jparkhill.com/?p=297#comment-5546 Thanks for the comment. I agree with you that Papermaster is on shaky ground.<br><br>IBM's complaint (copy here- <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/images/papermaster1.pdf">http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/images/papermaster1.pdf</a>) cites a Noncompetition Agreement that Papermaster signed. <br><br>I didn't find a copy of the complete agreement on a quick search and I don't know the full context of his employment arrangement, but the basic point remains the same- noncompetes are enforceable in New York and not in California. Fadell therefore gets paid ~$8.4 to be an advisor to Apple and Papermaster gets sued by IBM in Manhattan. It would be hard to find a more stark example of how this issue plays out. Thanks for the comment. I agree with you that Papermaster is on shaky ground.

IBM's complaint (copy here- http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/images/papermaster1.pdf) cites a Noncompetition Agreement that Papermaster signed.

I didn't find a copy of the complete agreement on a quick search and I don't know the full context of his employment arrangement, but the basic point remains the same- noncompetes are enforceable in New York and not in California. Fadell therefore gets paid ~$8.4 to be an advisor to Apple and Papermaster gets sued by IBM in Manhattan. It would be hard to find a more stark example of how this issue plays out.

]]> By: botchagalupe http://blog.jparkhill.com/2008/11/06/how-to-prevent-ipod-technology-falling-into-the-wrong-hands/comment-page-1/#comment-5545 botchagalupe Fri, 07 Nov 2008 06:24:03 +0000 http://blog.jparkhill.com/?p=297#comment-5545 I am not a lawyer not do I have an academic background in law. However, I have earned my cred on the street. I think a lot of people are missing the point regarding the IBM v. Apple suit. Everyone is quick to blurt out that non-compete are not enforcible. My experience is that this is a dangerous myth for perspective employees to assume. I am not even going to go close to trying to explain or understand California employment law; how, there are two facts in the IBM v Apple case that no one seems to want to point out. <br><br>1) The ex employee in question did not sign an Employment non-compete agreement, he signed an awards program agreement that had nothing to do with his terms of employment. <br><br>2) The jurisdiction agreed upon in that agreement is Westchester County NY. <br><br>Add the fact that it IBM who is making the suit against the individual, not Apple,I think it is beyond ludicrous to assume that IBM is maying a frivolous complaint. However, what do I know!<br><br><a href="http://johnmwillis.com">johnmwillis.com</a> I am not a lawyer not do I have an academic background in law. However, I have earned my cred on the street. I think a lot of people are missing the point regarding the IBM v. Apple suit. Everyone is quick to blurt out that non-compete are not enforcible. My experience is that this is a dangerous myth for perspective employees to assume. I am not even going to go close to trying to explain or understand California employment law; how, there are two facts in the IBM v Apple case that no one seems to want to point out.

1) The ex employee in question did not sign an Employment non-compete agreement, he signed an awards program agreement that had nothing to do with his terms of employment.

2) The jurisdiction agreed upon in that agreement is Westchester County NY.

Add the fact that it IBM who is making the suit against the individual, not Apple,I think it is beyond ludicrous to assume that IBM is maying a frivolous complaint. However, what do I know!

johnmwillis.com

]]>