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

Tell HN: Beware confidentiality agreements that act as lifetime non competes

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 269 posts

Re: Tell HN: Beware confidentiality agreements that act as lifetime non competes

#11

Post by llm_nerd »

kirubakaran wrote: post #7

It's funny how states like Washington are notorious for enforceable non-competes, to be "business friendly". Meanwhile California bans non-competes, and its GDP is 4th largest in the world if it were a country! "incumbent friendly" vs "startup friendly"

I'm pro-California and anti-noncompetes, but I'm not sure if this evidence demonstrates much. The banning of non-competes in California is a very recent thing, and if we're doing a correlation thing, California saw the vast bulk of its growth when non-competes were in effect.

Re: Tell HN: Beware confidentiality agreements that act as lifetime non competes

#12

Post by OutOfHere »

Traubenfuchs wrote: post #10
OutOfHere wrote: post #9

What exactly should one be on the lookout for? Practically every company has an IP confidentiality agreement.

Yeah, good luck being the odd one out who wants special individualized contract. This might work for unicorn value level employees that are poached from one FANG to another but not for the average Joe.

I never said I want an individualized contract, but I reserve the right to reject the offer, and I have, when the contract is unreasonable. What I want to know is when exactly to reject it wrt the confidentiality agreement.

Re: Tell HN: Beware confidentiality agreements that act as lifetime non competes

#14

Post by haxton »

llm_nerd wrote: post #11
kirubakaran wrote: post #7

It's funny how states like Washington are notorious for enforceable non-competes, to be "business friendly". Meanwhile California bans non-competes, and its GDP is 4th largest in the world if it were a country! "incumbent friendly" vs "startup friendly"

I'm pro-California and anti-noncompetes, but I'm not sure if this evidence demonstrates much. The banning of non-competes in California is a very recent thing, and if we're doing a correlation thing, California saw the vast bulk of its growth when non-competes were in effect.

California has banned non competes since 1872. You might be thinking about non solicits which was 2024 also reaffirming the ban on non competes

Re: Tell HN: Beware confidentiality agreements that act as lifetime non competes

#15

Post by loaph »

llm_nerd wrote: post #11
kirubakaran wrote: post #7

It's funny how states like Washington are notorious for enforceable non-competes, to be "business friendly". Meanwhile California bans non-competes, and its GDP is 4th largest in the world if it were a country! "incumbent friendly" vs "startup friendly"

I'm pro-California and anti-noncompetes, but I'm not sure if this evidence demonstrates much. The banning of non-competes in California is a very recent thing, and if we're doing a correlation thing, California saw the vast bulk of its growth when non-competes were in effect.

It’s not a recent thing. Search for 1872 here, https://www.purduegloballawschool.edu/blog/news/california-n...

Some form of a ban on noncompete enforcement in CA has existed since then.

It has long been codified in CA business code 16600, https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...

Re: Tell HN: Beware confidentiality agreements that act as lifetime non competes

#16

Post by btilly »

This is a state level thing. As is whether IP produced outside of your job, on your own equipment, is yours.

I moved from New York to California a bit over 20 years ago in large part because I personally encountered this (the IP ownership bit), and preferred to live under California's rules.

It is worthwhile to read https://www.paulgraham.com/america.html. Point 7 talks about how easy it is for regulations to accidentally squash startups. I believe that the fact that California makes neither mistake causes us squash fewer startups. It is not sufficient to have made Silicon Valley a startup hub, but it was likely necessary.

Re: Tell HN: Beware confidentiality agreements that act as lifetime non competes

#17

Post by dboreham »

OutOfHere wrote: post #9

What exactly should one be on the lookout for? Practically every company has an IP confidentiality agreement.

ianal but: don't perform personal work while you are employed by an employer in the same industry. Or at least make it like you didn't do that to any observer.

Re: Tell HN: Beware confidentiality agreements that act as lifetime non competes

#18

Post by throwarayes »

btilly wrote: post #16

This is a state level thing. As is whether IP produced outside of your job, on your own equipment, is yours. I moved from New York to California a bit over 20 years ago in large part because I personally encountered this (the IP ownership bit), and preferred to live under California's rules. It is worthwhile to read https://www.paulgraham.com/america.html . Point 7 talks about how easy it is for regulations to accide…

It also depends on the laws governing your contract, not just where you live.

Re: Tell HN: Beware confidentiality agreements that act as lifetime non competes

#19

Post by matsemann »

So happy my union managed to ban broad non-competes in my country ~8 years ago. Now it needs to be very specific if they want to enforce it (not just "development work in the same industry" which most contracts had back when I graduated), only applicable for maximum a year, and they have to pay your salary for the time they stop you working somewhere else.

Re: Tell HN: Beware confidentiality agreements that act as lifetime non competes

#20

Post by xhrpost »

btilly wrote: post #16

This is a state level thing. As is whether IP produced outside of your job, on your own equipment, is yours. I moved from New York to California a bit over 20 years ago in large part because I personally encountered this (the IP ownership bit), and preferred to live under California's rules. It is worthwhile to read https://www.paulgraham.com/america.html . Point 7 talks about how easy it is for regulations to accide…

Just looking this up but appears NY finally caught up here in 2023 https://newyork.public.law/laws/n.y._labor_law_section_203-f
Post reply on HN