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

191–200 of 223 posts

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

#191

Post by MertsA »

tonfa wrote: post #30
anarazel wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think cases like this can largely be dealt with by allowing non-competes, but only as long compensation continues. Without that the power imbalances are just too extreme. EDIT: rephrased to make clear I wasn't just referring to base salary.

A large part of compensation is probably not in base salary, that'd be asking for like a 50% compensation cut.

Even just base salary, if that's not something they'll stop paying the second you land a job somewhere else that could be completely reasonable. That'd be an extra 50% on top of whatever other job just to avoid direct competitors for the next year or so. I'd take that deal, and not just because an offer was contingent on it.

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

#192

Post by mroche »

gambiting wrote: post #174
tuna-piano wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Yeah, this approach of burning bridges is shocking to me. I work in the video games industry and people very frequently leave...only to return in 2-3 years again. Company hopping is very frequent(for various reasons, main of which is money) but most people seem to understand that you cannot, under any circumstances, burn bridges on either side. The junior leaving you now might come back as a senior in 4 years time. T…

Similar situation in the VFX industry. Post-employment NCAs would devastate this industry and ruin the lives of thousands of individuals with how this industry works. And add more spots on the map of which studios to completely avoid.

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

#193

Post by projektfu »

csunbird wrote: post #140
bsder wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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

There are some restraints on the ability for someone to sue you just to give you a headache, such as dismissing a case with prejudice or anti-SLAPP laws.

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

#194

Post by Chris2048 »

NonEUCitizen wrote: post #80
xref wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you’re not violating the non-compete in a jurisdiction where the contract is enforceable, like by moving to California?

The old one still applies in the previous contract (and is enforceable in the old jurisdiction).

what does "enforceable in the old jurisdiction" mean? They send out bounty hunters to drag you back?

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

#195

Post by ghaff »

QuinnyPig wrote: post #116
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…

The hell of it is that an awful lot of companies would shrug, back away slowly, rescind the job offer, and select a different candidate. I mean, the alternative is going toe to toe in a legal fight with freaking Amazon--what sane person would do such a thing?! I can't abide a bully.

Even aside from the actual legal threats in this case, just the existence of these broad non-competes (or often even a non-compete at all unless, maybe, it's very narrowly drawn.

I worked for a small consulting firm for a number of years and we passed on at least one candidate we'd have been interested in because they were at a big client, had a probably irrelevant NDA, but my management was pretty much "Big nope. Not worth the risk."

Fortunately the one time I had to sign one because of an acquisition, it was actually fairly narrow. (You couldn't go to a competing storage company at VP level or above for x months.) Though it admittedly helped that I wasn't actually in the storage division of the acquired company.

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

#196

Post by eloisant »

auggierose wrote: post #187
csunbird wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like it comes back down to the ethics. A lawyer should not accept the case, because they should know the case is not valid, but they do it regardless. If there was a repercussion for accepting too many invalid cases or suing people for not legal grounds, they would stop doing that. But, that is not going to happen obviously.

I don't know, as long as lawyers are allowed to defend murderers, you cannot really argue why they wouldn't be allowed to defend companies in such a case.

There is a difference between defending someone who is indicted (the lawsuit is going to happen no matter what, and the defendant has a right to a lawyer), and initiating a lawsuit.

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

#197

Post by mrep »

snowwrestler wrote: post #136
marcinzm wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Those unions aren't specific to one company/team though and are mainly to set pay floors because they work in a glamorous industry that people are desperate to get into and so they are used to raise the people outside of the competitive spotlight pay in the industry. If you want to start an non-company specific union for developers, by all means, start one but I see no reason to join it considering the only reason people are desperate to be developers is because it pays well.

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

#198

Post by ghaff »

stevage wrote: post #172
anon98356 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main argument for non-competes comes from banking/professional services (thinks accountants or lawyers). It's to stop you taking all your clients with you when you jump ship. It's typically only enforced for partners or really senior managers and the theory is, it allows the company time to cement their relationship with the client while you're out of the market. I have often seen it enforced as, you can go (afte…

Using a non-compete for that is overreaching. You could simply ban that much more specific behaviour you're trying to prevent.

Yes, companies can have non-solicitation agreements which are IMO quite reasonable so long as they cover a reasonable time period and AFAIK are generally enforceable.

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

#200

Post by marcinzm »

gxon wrote: post #89
marcinzm wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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's interesting how many successful, creative people seem to be incapable at imagining themselves not being so successful one day. What you perform well at today won't necessarily be valuable in the future.

So you're advocating for a union that pays a premium for those employees who have seniority but whose skills are no longer in much demand? At the cost of salary for those whose skills have remained in demand or who have kept up to date with trends? After all, otherwise what advantage does a a union have in your scenario?

I doubt many well performing SEs would be happy to have coworkers like that in the future.

The ones worried about future marketability have many options including saving a lager percentage of income, investing money in passive income sources, moving into management, etc.

Post reply on HN