Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon sues former AWS marketing VP Brian Hall after he takes Google Cloud job

geekwire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 223 posts

Re: Amazon sues former AWS marketing VP Brian Hall after he takes Google Cloud job

#131

Post by alkibiades »

twblalock wrote: post #90
simonebrunozzi wrote: post #8

There is a chance that some people with a history worth sharing might not be, and never be, in a position to talk. I personally think that non-compete agreements are a strange beast. On one side, you want to avoid people "switching sides" and bring important secrets with them, possibly the reason why they've been hired by a competitor. On the other side, you want a competitive job market, so that people would get the…

> On one side, you want to avoid people "switching sides" and bring important secrets with them, possibly the reason why they've been hired by a competitor. Noncompetes are only about preventing talent from working for the competition. They aren't really about protecting secrets, because those are already protected. There are laws against stealing trade secrets, and NDAs in addition to those laws.

see: anthony lewandowski

Re: Amazon sues former AWS marketing VP Brian Hall after he takes Google Cloud job

#132

Post by yashap »

Lukas_Skywalker wrote: post #114
yashap wrote: post #113

Non-competes should be completely killed. Disclosing confidential trade secrets should be a legal issue, but getting a new job with a competitor shouldn’t be, as long as you don’t share confidential info with them. If you build up a tonne of domain knowledge, and become an expert, you should be able to leverage that expertise by continuing to work in that domain, as long as you aren’t sharing legit secrets.

I once started a job where the contract contained a very weird clause: I wouldn’t be able to use any programming-related knowledge I gained at the job for my future jobs. Obviously that‘s not enforceable, but it led to a ridiculous discussion where I tried to explain to them that if previous employers did this, I could only use the knowledge I gained before being employed - effectively programming like during highsch…

Wow, that is absolutely insane.

Re: Amazon sues former AWS marketing VP Brian Hall after he takes Google Cloud job

#133

Post by np_tedious »

bcantrill wrote: post #65

Ugh, this garbage again. AWS came after someone I had hired trying to enforce the same non-compete, under more or less the same circumstances (Washington-based employee, working remote out of California). In the process I learned a bunch about this non-compete, and in particular about Amazon's behavior with respect to it: as of 2012, they had tried to enforce this non-compete "hundreds" of times -- and to the knowled…

Is this exclusive to AWS or have other divisions of Amazon behaved similarly?

Re: Amazon sues former AWS marketing VP Brian Hall after he takes Google Cloud job

#134

Post by turboturbo »

franczesko wrote: post #96
bcantrill wrote: post #65

Ugh, this garbage again. AWS came after someone I had hired trying to enforce the same non-compete, under more or less the same circumstances (Washington-based employee, working remote out of California). In the process I learned a bunch about this non-compete, and in particular about Amazon's behavior with respect to it: as of 2012, they had tried to enforce this non-compete "hundreds" of times -- and to the knowled…

This wouldn't be able to happen in EU as well. Previous employer can't force you to not being able to offer your services in the job market. They can pay you instead.

This is factually incorrect

Re: Amazon sues former AWS marketing VP Brian Hall after he takes Google Cloud job

#135

Post by solarkraft »

turboturbo wrote: post #134
franczesko wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This wouldn't be able to happen in EU as well. Previous employer can't force you to not being able to offer your services in the job market. They can pay you instead.

This is factually incorrect

Please elaborate

Re: Amazon sues former AWS marketing VP Brian Hall after he takes Google Cloud job

#136

Post by snowwrestler »

marcinzm wrote: post #63
JoshTko wrote: post #59

It's ironic seeing so many people in this thread being against non-competes, yet seeing so few people for unionizing in other HN threads.

The perception seems to be that unions hurt well performing employees more than they help. Non-competes are perceived as hurting well performing employees. Why is it surprising that the same group, which perceives itself as well performing employees, would oppose both?

It really depends on which unions you look at. When people hear "union," they think of Teamsters and autoworkers and elementary school teachers.

But Steven Spielberg, Tom Cruise, Lebron James, and Tom Brady are all examples of union members too.

Re: Amazon sues former AWS marketing VP Brian Hall after he takes Google Cloud job

#137

Post by radioheads »

tuna-piano wrote: post #93
bcantrill wrote: post #65

Ugh, this garbage again. AWS came after someone I had hired trying to enforce the same non-compete, under more or less the same circumstances (Washington-based employee, working remote out of California). In the process I learned a bunch about this non-compete, and in particular about Amazon's behavior with respect to it: as of 2012, they had tried to enforce this non-compete "hundreds" of times -- and to the knowled…

It's quite an interesting strategy and for all Amazon's "long-termism", it's a strategy that seems quite short-term focused. It may make their current employees decide not to leave, but it may also lower morale and make future recruits not join. Talk to decision makers deciding which database to buy and see their thoughts about Oracle. Many have been around for decades and have worked for or with the company and refu…

Amazon's non-compete was the deciding factor for me not to join the company.

I went through all steps of the recruitment process, but bailed out after receiving the offer. I've had a chat with the hiring contact and I did tell them that I was concerned about the NCA, but they simply waived those away telling me "it's not a big deal". Funnily, even though they were asking if they could change something in the offer to convince me to join, the NCA was something that they wouldn't budge on.

Since me joining Amazon meant moving all the way from Europe, I was really uncomfortable with the prospect of potentially being stuck at Amazon because of that NCA, so I wished them luck and rejected the offer.

Re: Amazon sues former AWS marketing VP Brian Hall after he takes Google Cloud job

#138

Post by adrr »

m0zg wrote: post #10
simonebrunozzi wrote: post #8

There is a chance that some people with a history worth sharing might not be, and never be, in a position to talk. I personally think that non-compete agreements are a strange beast. On one side, you want to avoid people "switching sides" and bring important secrets with them, possibly the reason why they've been hired by a competitor. On the other side, you want a competitive job market, so that people would get the…

> bring important secrets with them BS. That's what NDAs are for.

Trade secrets law is the stick that keeps people from sharing former company secrets. People don't want to go to jail or have a felony on their record.

Re: Amazon sues former AWS marketing VP Brian Hall after he takes Google Cloud job

#139

Post by edanm »

twblalock wrote: post #88
jedberg wrote: post #37

You know you're cool when you need a lawyer to change jobs. I think it would be reasonable to allow non-competes, however, the company should have to keep paying you your full compensation (salary, stock, bonuses, etc) for as long as they keep you from being employed. Sure, give the old employer veto power for a new job as long as they keep paying them for the lockout period.

The tech industry in California does just fine without noncompetes. In fact, lack of noncompetes is probably one of the biggest reasons Silicon Valley was able to take off in the 1950s-60s when people were constantly leaving their jobs to start new chip companies, starting with the original "traitorous 8" who founded Fairchild Semiconductor. There just aren't good arguments for noncompetes. People often bring up trad…

> There just aren't good arguments for noncompetes.

I think the standard argument isn't trade secrets. The standard argument is that you want to incentivize employers to train employees.

If I, as an employer, train you for 6 months, then you leave at month 7 for a higher salary (which you can demand cause you have more training/experience), I lose out. So I have no incentive to train you. So training or hiring of people without experience never takes place (or does so at a lower rate).

If you are someone without experience, and there was a way for you to credibly commit to not moving to a new job (e.g. by signing a non-compete), then you might want to make that bargain - it's worth it for you to sign away some freedom in order to get some advantage (which is kind of the basis for all contracts).

That's the theory, anyway. I have no idea how much it holds up in the real world.

> The tech industry in California does just fine without noncompetes.

Obviously, the counterargument is that it could be doing even better, we just don't know it.

Note that if the standard argument is correct, then there's a chance that the biggest group of people hurt by lack of noncompetes are people without experience. You might not necessarily be feeling their pain, depending on your social circle (e.g. if you're a working developer in an SV company, you're surrounded by the people who did make it, not by the possibly numerous people who faced closed doors because of this).

Re: Amazon sues former AWS marketing VP Brian Hall after he takes Google Cloud job

#140

Post by csunbird »

bsder wrote: post #79
QuinnyPig wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something to point out here: the guy Brian reported to is based in California, where non-competes are held to be unenforceable. If non-competes are truly as strategically necessary as Amazon says they are, why on earth would they hire such a senior executive in a jurisdiction that wouldn't uphold them?

> non-competes are held to be unenforceable They're not completely unenforceable in California. And the company can make your life miserable by suing you because you have to hire and pay the lawyer to win the case. However, you generally have to be someone at this guy's level before non-competes can even have a chance of being enforceable. And there are lots of weird restrictions--you have to have access to data that…

> And the company can make your life miserable by suing you because you have to hire and pay the lawyer to win the case.

This is the part that I can not understand about United States. How is this even allowed? It is literally bullying someone to submit, even if what you do is illegal.

One of the main reasons I choose to immigrate to EU instead of US

Post reply on HN