White House urges ban on non-compete agreements for many workers • Hacker News Board

Re: White House urges ban on non-compete agreements for many workers

#401

Post by jnicholasp » Thu, Oct 27, 2016, 8:29 AM UTC

Kalium wrote: post #381

jnicholasp wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that ideas have no value is prima facie ridiculous. The reason we aren't just a slightly odd species of chimpanzees is that we developed the ability to produce ideas. Ideas are the only thing of fundamental value to us as an intelligent species. The statement that ideas don't matter, only execution matters, can only apply among sets of trivial ideas that don't change the landscape. Yes, if you want to make F…

The reason we aren't just a slightly odd species of chimpanzees is that we developed the ability execute on ideas. Otherwise we're low-hair primates thinking about maybe fire.

> Ideas are the only thing of fundamental value to us as an intelligent species.

I'm not arguing that execution has no value. Obviously ideas, particularly business/startup ideas, must be acted on effectively in order to become real. But: ideas are logically prior to execution; the ability to conceive of abstract ideas is a far larger developmental step than is the subsequent ability to act on those ideas; and being able to have abstract ideas is the thing that most definitively separates homo sapiens from all other species on Earth.

Re: White House urges ban on non-compete agreements for many workers

#402

Post by bahularora » Thu, Oct 27, 2016, 8:51 AM UTC

CaptSpify wrote: post #288

falcolas wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It also said all the IP/Products/patents I develop, even in my own time, during my tenure would belong by the employer. These clauses are getting worse too, claiming what you develop up to a year after you leave the company. I had to sign one of these or not take the job, non-negotiable. Not taking the job wasn't a choice at that time, sadly.

This, to me, is the shadiest part of non-competes. I've only gotten one, but it was after I had quit my previous job, and moved across the country. Am I supposed to say no, now that I've already moved and have no other current source of income for my family? Shame on me for not asking up-front what I would have to sign, but also, how is it legal to start throwing new contracts at someone, when they weren't part of th…

I am gonna try to change the management's mind about these policies. I am hopeful that they would accept my request especially since these are not enforceable in court and this would makes the whole agreement void.

Is it legal to have a extremely one sided agreement? Also if it is signed under threat(no job/no livelihood) isn't it void, as its signed under duress?

Re: White House urges ban on non-compete agreements for many workers

#403

Post by jnicholasp » Thu, Oct 27, 2016, 9:05 AM UTC

googletazer wrote: post #354

jnicholasp wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that ideas have no value is prima facie ridiculous. The reason we aren't just a slightly odd species of chimpanzees is that we developed the ability to produce ideas. Ideas are the only thing of fundamental value to us as an intelligent species. The statement that ideas don't matter, only execution matters, can only apply among sets of trivial ideas that don't change the landscape. Yes, if you want to make F…

>Ideas are the only thing of fundamental value to us as an intelligent species. I'm sorry but you're wrong. Its not ideas that are the only thing of fundamental value... information might come close. Ideas + experimentation to validate them + implementation is where its at. An idea by itself without execution is a fantasy.

> Ideas are the only thing of fundamental value to us as an intelligent species.

In my usage, 'information' describes patterns that exist in the universe, and 'ideas', at least loosely, describes the apprehension of one or more of those inherent patterns by an intelligent mind. An idea is the mental perception or conception of external information. Information might be fundamental to the universe, but ideas are fundamental to intelligent minds, being the lens through and by which we perceive everything.

My point, though, was mostly that it's false that ideas have no value - I wasn't trying to make the complete opposite error and say that execution has no value. Of course to make something happen in the world you need execution as well as something to execute.

Re: White House urges ban on non-compete agreements for many workers

#404

Post by mcv » Thu, Oct 27, 2016, 10:51 AM UTC

wruza wrote: post #400

otoburb wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>[...] restricts the freedom to restrict freedom [...] That's a great turn of phrase. I'll try to use it the next time somebody asks me to summarize the GPL, which has similar restrictions built in as per Stallman's original intent.

RMS always cared about software freedom, not human's.

He cares about the end user's freedom. Not about the intermediary developer's freedom to restrict the end user's freedom.

Re: White House urges ban on non-compete agreements for many workers

#405

Post by closeparen » Thu, Oct 27, 2016, 1:22 PM UTC

ekianjo wrote: post #11

Animats wrote: post #4

Note that this is being proposed as something states should do. Federal legislation is not being proposed. Worst case would be Federal legislation which was weak and pre-empted state legislation, weakening California's ban. California employment law prohibits non-compete agreements for employees, and has since 1872. California also prohibits any employee agreement which claims employer ownership of intellectual prope…

> California also prohibits any employee agreement which claims employer ownership of intellectual property developed on the employee's own time I have always wondered how could such a claim on ownership could exist in the first place. This reduces the employee to a mere company slave.

Some interpret a salary as buying all of your intellectual output for as long as you have the job. This position generally holds that the employee needs to be hourly for the concept of "employee's own time" to make any sense.

Re: White House urges ban on non-compete agreements for many workers

#406

Post by omouse » Thu, Oct 27, 2016, 2:44 PM UTC

jaredklewis wrote: post #388

omouse wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I guess the problem in practice is that employees just sign their employment contract no matter what it says, which is unfortunate. In other words, the problem is that they are coercive . Employees usually sign because the company has more legal power and can be intimidating or because they could be homeless.

If companies had that much leverage we would all work at minimum wage. I've seen non-competes in contracts with 150k+ compensation. Getting 150k to do something is not coercion, it's an exchange. As for people becoming homeless, I think welfare should be the duty of the government, not individual corporations. I agree that contracts can be intimidating, but they shouldn't be. Non competes, like most things, can be sp…

> If companies had that much leverage we would all work at minimum wage

Yes, we would! And they try really hard to do that.

> I've seen non-competes in contracts with 150k+ compensation. Getting 150k to do something is not coercion, it's an exchange.

When you're generating value in excess of double that amount? It's coercion, you aren't get paid your worth. We've actually seen this with the big tech companies like Intel, Google and Adobe. They kept salaries down for over 4 years so that 150k and a non-compete actually is a huge hindrance and it is coercion.

Re: White House urges ban on non-compete agreements for many workers

#407

Post by madcaptenor » Thu, Oct 27, 2016, 2:49 PM UTC

GeneralMayhem wrote: post #304

MaxfordAndSons wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is fucking unbelievable - it's basically contractual extortion. Though the 3 mile clause makes it an entirely different beast than a tech noncompete. Which makes me wonder - are noncompetes ever enforced internationally? Or rather, are there countries that explicitly and reciprocally enforce US noncompetes?

Not being allowed to work within 3 miles of a Jimmy Johns can rule out working in fast food in an entire city.

For an illustration of this, take a look at the Jimmy John's noncompete map, which maps out everything that's within 3 miles of a Jimmy John's: http://sigacts.com/jimmy-johns-non-compete-zones/ .

Re: White House urges ban on non-compete agreements for many workers

#408

Post by SilasX » Thu, Oct 27, 2016, 2:54 PM UTC

wfo wrote: post #395

SilasX wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's with the hate for plea bargains? Should every charge go to trial? In cases where a conviction isn't guaranteed, why shouldn't they split the difference between going free and the full penalty? Every time I've challenged someone on this point, their objection turns out not to be about plea bargains per se, but the (unrelated) fact that the law permits such severe punishments in the first place, defendants have…

Yes, anyone who is charged with something serious should go to trial. It's expensive, but you're locking a person in a cage with criminals for years of their life (incidentally to be repeatedly beaten and raped, but we can leave aside problems with the CJ system that aren't explicitly plea bargains for the moment), not choosing a floral arrangement. I agree the extreme and severe punishments exacerbate the problems w…

I still don't see the logic. You're okay with

- someone pleading guilty in return for an indefinite punishment, but not a definite one, and

- someone getting a more time in the horrible, horrible cage because the trial found them guilty but not less because they realized they would lose

- someone getting mercy from the court for pleading guilty, but not "getting special treatment and rewards for waiving right to trial" (which a guilty plea is)

- someone leaving their fate in the hands of a capricious, unpredictable jury, but not leaving their fate in the hands of a capricious, unpredictable sentencing judge for the guilty plea

I just don't see a consistent preference ordering that spits out "plea bargains should be banned".

Re: White House urges ban on non-compete agreements for many workers

#409

Post by LinuxBender » Thu, Oct 27, 2016, 3:01 PM UTC

pauldix wrote: post #314

LinuxBender wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK and from my own experience, non-competes are not enforceable in most states, or have little to no legal teeth. Anyone concerned should consult with an attorney. Somewhat related, where folks usually get into trouble is reuse of intellectual property or derivative works. IP laws actually have teeth and are enforced in numerous countries.

In our system it actually doesn't matter if they have no legal teeth. If your former employer wants to spend money to take you to court to attempt to enforce a non-compete, you'll be forced to spend tens of thousands of dollars (if not hundreds) defending yourself. It doesn't matter if they'll eventually lose. Just as long as they can play legal chicken with you and get you to give up because you don't want to waste…

I completely agree that some businesses will play chicken. Fear of being dragged into court is a powerful thing.

Re: White House urges ban on non-compete agreements for many workers

#410

Post by MaxfordAndSons » Thu, Oct 27, 2016, 4:10 PM UTC

jnicholasp wrote: post #401

Kalium wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason we aren't just a slightly odd species of chimpanzees is that we developed the ability execute on ideas. Otherwise we're low-hair primates thinking about maybe fire.

> Ideas are the only thing of fundamental value to us as an intelligent species. I'm not arguing that execution has no value. Obviously ideas, particularly business/startup ideas, must be acted on effectively in order to become real. But: ideas are logically prior to execution; the ability to conceive of abstract ideas is a far larger developmental step than is the subsequent ability to act on those ideas; and being…

I agree with what you're saying here, but the argument isn't about the the value of ideas with regards to our species's success, but rather about the value of ideas with regards to a given businesses's success.