By now most people have heard about Microsoft suing Google and Kai Fu-Lee because Lee, a former exec at Microsoft, went to work at Google at a new research and development office in China. The lawsuit cites that Lee signed a noncompete agreement in 2000, preventing him from working for a competitor within a set period of time of leaving Microsoft (1 year, I believe).
Apparently, Google has filed a countersuit (in California) stating that the non-compete contract violates California laws giving workers the right to change jobs. Obviously Google would like to bring the battle to California court due to having incredibly lax non-compete laws, however, Microsoft's claim (and where Lee worked and signed his agreement) was filed in Washington. Interestingly, the job Lee would have is based in China.
I have to side with my employer (Microsoft, if you haven't been paying attention) on this one. Google said in a statement: "Google is trying to create an environment for innovators. Microsoft is focused on litigation and intimidation." In a naive kind of way, I can
almost see the corporate Panacea Google wants here. Would outlawing noncompete agreements increase innovation and retention strategies? Maybe.
But the fact is, Lee signed an agreement as part of his role at Microsoft. If he didn't want to enter into that type of arrangement, he should've refused the job or asked for that restriction to be removed. The agreements each employee signs are very clear, it's not like some spyware EULA buried in 30 pages of text viewed in a 4 line text box.
I don't think having noncompete agreements hurt innovation, but rather help promote integrity. The fact is, in certain positions people will have intimate knowledge of trade secrets and internal workings that make the employee more valuable not just because of their skills and talent, but because of the privileged knowledge they carry. There's no reasonable way a person can "withhold" using that information if they jump ship to a competitor -- hence, the 6 month or 1 year delay.
I respect that fact that many people will have different views on the legality behind noncompete agreements. Still, regardless of the outcome, I feel it's unfortunate to see the slinging between Google and Microsoft. The unethics clearly lie on Lee, as he signed the agreement and doesn't wish to honor it now. Wouldn't that say something to Google about his loyalties or "honor"?