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

FTC announces rule banning noncompetes

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 530 posts

Re: FTC announces rule banning noncompetes

#321

Post by oceanplexian »

xpe wrote: post #272
oceanplexian wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chances are extremely high that the current Supreme Court nullifies or greatly restricts Chevron. These kind of announcements are fuel for the fire and are likely to accelerate its demise. They will kill this faster than they killed the COVID vaccine mandate. Govt. agencies can’t make laws, even if we may agree with them (I actually do in this case). However this isn’t the role of an unelected government agency.

It is wise to look at an argument with extra caution when you see the phrase “unelected government agency”. There are (of course) valid powers available to agencies. The question is what powers are valid. Beware the dark arts of rhetoric. I’m familiar with spotting this one because my constitutional law professor used it often. He helped us to see right through it. Logic and argumentation should win, not words design…

There’s not a better, more compact way to explain the problem. Congress, when they delegated powers to the FTC, did not envision them banning private non-compete agreements. It’s a non-trivial issue. Lawmakers weren’t stupid, non-competes existed at the time they formed the FTC. They had the power, the knowledge, and the intelligence to draft a law. They did not.

The burden of proof is on the Government to prove that Congress explicitly intended the agency to regulate this part of contract law. Like I said before, I personally support banning non-competes. But it has to be done legally. It has to be done within the constraints of a system of laws.

Re: FTC announces rule banning noncompetes

#322

Post by tired_star_nrg »

DebtDeflation wrote: post #304
datadrivenangel wrote: post #15

The rule goes into effect 120 days after it gets published in the federal register, and at which point all previous non-competes are unenforceable EXCEPT for senior executives. Senior executives cannot enter into new non-competes though.

How is Senior Executive defined? C-Level only? Named Executive Officers on the 10-K?

Making over ~$160k and making policy decisions

Re: FTC announces rule banning noncompetes

#323

Post by mlhpdx »

fsckboy wrote: post #311
akira2501 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've always thought of that as representing a stifling of innovation. The short lifetime of patents and the requirement that you publish detailed information about the invention significantly mitigates this. If they were measuring innovation by the number of copyrights filed, then I might agree with you.

for software patents they should have to disclose the sourcecode

Any patent that fails to “teach” the innovation can be challenged and will likely prevail if it’s an egregious gap. That’s the public benefit part, in writing.

Re: FTC announces rule banning noncompetes

#326

Post by triceratops »

bluGill wrote: post #232
triceratops wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love for my company's competitor to buy me up. Shit let them all go to war for the privilege of employing my ass.

I doubt you are that valuable. Sure software developers are high priced, but without even knowing what company you work for I bet I can do your job at a competitor and after 3 years I'd be just as good - that is worst case when I have to learn a new programming language to expert level as well as the domain. There are only a few people who have special skills that it is even worth thinking about protected. Someone wh…

Then the person I responded to has nothing to worry about.

Re: FTC announces rule banning noncompetes

#327

Post by patmcc »

EasyMark wrote: post #279
akira2501 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've always thought of that as representing a stifling of innovation. The short lifetime of patents and the requirement that you publish detailed information about the invention significantly mitigates this. If they were measuring innovation by the number of copyrights filed, then I might agree with you.

How is the lifetime of patents short? I mean they last for 20 years, that's an entire generation of time to make a profit?

They're short relative to other IP (like copyright), and short relative to inventions that have long R&D and cost recovery timelines. If $NEW_DRUG takes 5 years to develop, 5 years to trial, 5 years to market, and 5 years to profit...20 years isn't all that long.

If the invention takes 3 weeks and $0, yeah, 20 years is a long time.

Re: FTC announces rule banning noncompetes

#328

Post by BurningFrog »

crote wrote: post #131
akira2501 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've always thought of that as representing a stifling of innovation. The short lifetime of patents and the requirement that you publish detailed information about the invention significantly mitigates this. If they were measuring innovation by the number of copyrights filed, then I might agree with you.

In theory? Yes. In practice? No. For a lot of industries 20 years is an awfully long time to the point of complete irrelevance - and that "detailed information" is often vague enough to be unusable. Combine that with an overly-broad range of patent-able things and an overworked USPTO granting clearly invalid patents, and in practice (at least in the tech/software world) it's doing more harm than good. Patents are no…

I think different patent lengths for different industries would do much to improve the current insanity.

Re: FTC announces rule banning noncompetes

#329

Post by gnicholas »

FredPret wrote: post #296

> "‘Robbing people of their economic liberty also robs them of all sorts of other freedoms,’ said FTC Chair Lina Khan, who appeared at a House hearing in 2023." Should be the motto of every government in the world.

I wonder if she applies this maxim selectively, or if she would also oppose other impositions on economic liberty, such as minimum wage laws.

Re: FTC announces rule banning noncompetes

#330

Post by octopoc »

yyhhsj0521 wrote: post #255
michtzik wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does health insurance coverage work during the garden leave period?

There is the option to COBRA. I just switched to be on my wife's insurance.

In my (limited) experience, COBRA is far, far more expensive than buying on healthcare.gov.
Post reply on HN