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

Judge stops FTC from enforcing ban on non-compete agreements

computerworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 222 posts

Re: Judge stops FTC from enforcing ban on non-compete agreements

#121

Post by flanked-evergl »

waciki wrote: post #114
flanked-evergl wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No US prisoner is forced to work in any meaningful sense of the word "forced". They can just not work, they won't get beaten for it, they won't get killed for it. In some states, they are required to work. It's not the same as being forced to work. Being a criminal does not entitled them to free room and board on the taxpayer dime, in fact in a just world, society would be entitled to restitution from the criminal. T…

> No US prisoner is forced to work in any meaningful sense of the word "forced". "Refusal to work can be met with solitary confinement and physical beatings" https://web.archive.org/web/20240224172720/https://www.washi...

Corporal punishment in prisons is not legal in the US[1][2][3].

Prolonged solitary confinement is being used for people who do not refuse to work as well, even for people who have not been convicted[1]. You may think it's inhumane, but it not slavery.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hope_v._Pelzer

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudson_v._McMillian

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estelle_v._Gamble

[4] https://eu.recordonline.com/story/news/local/2021/07/19/capi...

Re: Judge stops FTC from enforcing ban on non-compete agreements

#122

Post by lumb63 »

hyeonwho4 wrote: post #78
daft_pink wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think this is really an argument for or against non-complete agreements in the United States. It’s basic United States separation of powers. If Congress passed a law eliminating or banning non-completes, then it would be legal. As an asdie, it seems that the Biden administration is positioning itself to overstep it’s authority with things it feels would be popular with specific voting blocks that will obvious…

In this case the US Congress has delegated to the FTC the power to regulate competition in interstate trade and markets. The relevant law is as follows: " (1) Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful. (2) The Commission is hereby empowered and directed to prevent persons, partnerships, or corporations, exce…

The term “unfair” is extremely vague, and now (as it probably should be, IMO), laws are interpreted by the judiciary. If Congress wants a specific practice banned, then they can make a law to do so, rather than allowing unelected career bureaucrats to interpret the law as they see fit.

Re: Judge stops FTC from enforcing ban on non-compete agreements

#123

Post by tallanvor »

Micanthus wrote: post #119
TrackerFF wrote: post #112

Question from an outsider: Why is that 95% of the times I see something get stopped or overturned, it is from a court / judge in Texas?

A couple reasons: 1) Recency bias, you probably remember more of these cases from Texas right now because that's the subject of this article. 2) The district and appelate courts in the US vary widely in their judicial ideologies, and usually align closely with their local political leanings. In today's political landscape with a democratic administration, it's unsurprising that courts in conservative districts freque…

Let's be honest, though, for pro-business rulings #3 is the main reason. Businesses know that filing in that District is guaranteed to get them a judge that almost always sides with them.

Re: Judge stops FTC from enforcing ban on non-compete agreements

#124

Post by [deleted] »

flanked-evergl wrote: post #97
defrost wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's simply untrue. You don't speak for "all Americans". A number of Americans (>1) see their imprisonment as a modern form of slavery, one that is explicitly allowed by the US Constitution: The U.S. Constitution bans slavery except as punishment for a crime ... In Texas, some prison farms are located on the same land as former slave plantations. It's "meaningful" in that they feel (with good justification) that th…

People loosing their liberties because of breaking the law — as determined by due process — is not slavery. They may feel enslaved, but again they cannot feel enslaved in any meaningful sense of the word because they are not enslaved in any meaningful sense of the word. https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/the-my...

[deleted]

Re: Judge stops FTC from enforcing ban on non-compete agreements

#125

Post by razakel »

flanked-evergl wrote: post #109
waciki wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if you're being good faith, prisoners are forced to work https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison_farm

No US prisoner is forced to work in any meaningful sense of the word "forced". They can just not work, they won't get beaten for it, they won't get killed for it. In some states, they are required to work. It's not the same as being forced to work. Being a criminal does not entitled them to free room and board on the taxpayer dime, in fact in a just world, society would be entitled to restitution from the criminal. T…

>In some states, they are required to work.

>It's not the same as being forced to work.

That's exactly the same thing.

Re: Judge stops FTC from enforcing ban on non-compete agreements

#126

Post by flanked-evergl »

razakel wrote: post #125
flanked-evergl wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No US prisoner is forced to work in any meaningful sense of the word "forced". They can just not work, they won't get beaten for it, they won't get killed for it. In some states, they are required to work. It's not the same as being forced to work. Being a criminal does not entitled them to free room and board on the taxpayer dime, in fact in a just world, society would be entitled to restitution from the criminal. T…

>In some states, they are required to work. >It's not the same as being forced to work. That's exactly the same thing.

No it's not. There is no physical or legal coercion, i.e. no force, i.e. not forced.

Re: Judge stops FTC from enforcing ban on non-compete agreements

#127

Post by razakel »

flanked-evergl wrote: post #126
razakel wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>In some states, they are required to work. >It's not the same as being forced to work. That's exactly the same thing.

No it's not. There is no physical or legal coercion, i.e. no force, i.e. not forced.

What happens if you refuse?

Re: Judge stops FTC from enforcing ban on non-compete agreements

#128

Post by ahiknsr »

throwaway48476 wrote: post #115
TrackerFF wrote: post #112

Question from an outsider: Why is that 95% of the times I see something get stopped or overturned, it is from a court / judge in Texas?

Reflects the bias of your news reading. Federal courts mirror the politics of their location. Naturally this leads to circuit splits.

> Reflects the bias of your news reading.

Right, it only reflects the bias of what news we read and has nothing to do with reality.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Albright

> Alan D Albright[1][a] (born November 24, 1959)[2] is a United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. He was formerly a United States magistrate judge of the same court. Albright oversees a significant portion of patent litigation within the United States. In 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit repeatedly rebuked him in a string of opinions for failing to transfer cases to more apt jurisdictions. A quarter of all patent lawsuits in the US were once heard by Albright, who has been widely criticized for ignoring binding case law. However, following a docket-stripping order issued by Chief Judge Orlando Garcia, Albright's patent docket has declined precipitously

Re: Judge stops FTC from enforcing ban on non-compete agreements

#129

Post by vundercind »

flanked-evergl wrote: post #120
amanaplanacanal wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sold on this narrative. Which Republican cities are you comparing to?

The 10 most violent cities in the US are either democrat or independent controlled: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53991722

1) In part because most cities of any size are run by democrats.

2) “over 100,000 population”. This is the factor that prevents these from mostly being “red”. I assume this is because smaller cities and large towns are both more likely than large cities to be run by Republicans, and also more likely to have bad economies, which (the latter) is a pretty good predictor of crime.

3) The second graph with per-capita gets us closer to correct, the first being “this is just a population heat map” levels of useless. Note all the “blue” cities in red states in the second one. I’ve lived in such a city. It was hopelessly hobbled by the state government—anything “blue” it tried to do was outlawed at the state level as soon as they tried to do it. You can’t really treat those as experiments in Democratic governance.

Re: Judge stops FTC from enforcing ban on non-compete agreements

#130

Post by matwood »

brightball wrote: post #90
theshrike79 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK this is only valid if the non-compete effectively prevents you from working in your profession. Which is most of the time, granted.

I was told by an attorney years ago that non-competes were only enforceable if they had a reasonably defined scope and specifically were unenforceable in Right to Work states if it effectively prevented you from working at all. Reasonable scope was something like max 2 years, specific distance from current office that wasn’t excessive (couple of miles) or had specifics about taking existing customers.

Same. The biggest issue with non-competes is the intimidation factor. People are scared to challenge them even though without proper compensation and scope they are basically worthless. Few if any judges will prevent someone from making a living.

I also think they are mostly fine in the cases where they are properly constructed (compensation and scope).

Post reply on HN