Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Wow, that was unexpected. Great poach by Tesla. Tangential, but I really hate the term "poach" when referring to recruiting employees. We shouldn't think of hiring people as "poaching", because employees are not property. You can't "poach" an employee because there's no ownership, and employees should be free to make their own decisions regarding their employment opportunities.
I hope you similarly dislike the term 'head-hunt' on the grounds that no-one's head is severed. 'Poach' is a useful metaphor that suggests that one company actively tried to lure an employee from another. It is a metaphor, it doesn't imply that the employee is a chattel. I think one can get a bit too precious about these things.
"Poaching" doesn't refer to targeted hunting, though; it refers to hunting where one has no right to hunt. Of course, if this were just the etymology and nobody used it that way in the context of hiring, that wouldn't matter — but people do sometimes use it derogatorily, to suggest that one company has wronged the other. So I can see why somebody might prefer a less proprietary word.