[Eug]

I'm surprised nobody has posted this yet.

International Business Machines Corp sued a top executive on Thursday to prevent him from joining Apple Inc, court documents showed.

IBM said Mark Papermaster, who was vice president of the company's Blade Development unit until last week, signed a noncompete agreement with IBM that would prevent him from accepting a job with a competitor until one year after leaving the company.

These noncompete agreements are the norm for the industry but I think they're bogus. Just what do you expect people to do for a year after they quit? Play golf and drink lattes?

Anyways, what I'm really interested in is what he'll do at Apple. The Xserve began with the G4, but didn't really start to shine until Apple got IBM's G5 PPC 970.

Is this guy gonna kickstart Apple's server hardware offerings? Is Apple going to make a true blade?

[olePigeon]

Not sure if IBM can do anything. California Supreme Court ruled that non-compete clauses are unconstitutional.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Not sure if IBM can do anything. California Supreme Court ruled that non-compete clauses are unconstitutional.

Apple is being sued in California, but Mark Papermaster is being sued in New York. Has New York deemed non-compete clauses to be unconstitutional?

[mduell]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Not sure if IBM can do anything. California Supreme Court ruled that non-compete clauses are unconstitutional.

And this is relevant how?

[mattyb]

Um, could someone explain where Apple and IBM are up against each other? I have some pretty good IT experience but I've never heard of Apple being shortlisted for anything when IBM were shortlisted. BTW, I've never worked in film or art or music IT shops.

[turtle777]

You are right, it will be tricky to explain to a court why Apple at *THIS* point in time would be a serious competitor to IBM.

-t

[Eug]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

You are right, it will be tricky to explain to a court why Apple at *THIS* point in time would be a serious competitor to IBM.

Does that matter? As long as they're a competitor then that rule seems to apply.

Apple, a multibillion dollar company, makes rackservers, and that was this guy's speciality. In fact, Apple's G5 Xserves competed against IBM's G5 servers, and I wouldn't be completely surprised if Apple's G5 servers outsold IBM's G5 servers.

Nowadays, nobody uses G5s, but Apple's x86 servers compete against IBM's x86 servers. Obviously, Apple isn't a major competitor to IBM, but they're still a competitor...

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Does that matter? As long as they're a competitor then that rule seems to apply.

Of course it does, because in case this goes to trial, that assertion of "competitor" has to be proven beyond doubt.

-t

[The Godfather]

We shall see if the State of NY respects these repudiable No-Compete agreements :grr:

[The Godfather]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Does that matter? As long as they're a competitor then that rule seems to apply.

Apple, a multibillion dollar company, makes rackservers, and that was this guy's speciality. In fact, Apple's G5 Xserves competed against IBM's G5 servers, and I wouldn't be completely surprised if Apple's G5 servers outsold IBM's G5 servers.

Nowadays, nobody uses G5s, but Apple's x86 servers compete against IBM's x86 servers. Obviously, Apple isn't a major competitor to IBM, but they're still a competitor...

IBM is really clutching at straws with this suit. In the complaint text (see AI coverage), IBM claims that PA Semi's PowerPC chips has gaming features, and because the XBox uses PowerPCs, therefore they are competition.

IBM and Apple are competitors, the same way they are competitors with Dell and HP, IMO.

[Veltliner]

Apple will pay for it.

Some secrets are worth more than others.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by The Godfather 

IBM and Apple are competitors, the same way they are competitors with Dell and HP, IMO.

If true, then that would suggest the suit has merit. Apple, Dell, and HP all directly compete with each other.

[Doofy]

Congrats IBM - you've now ensured that Doof will now buy xServe instead of xSeries for all his serving requirements.

[Eug]

Papermaster is replacing Fadell.

Reuters summary of WSJ article:

One of Apple Inc's top executives, who was part of the development of the iPod, has decided to leave the company and will be replaced by a former employee of International Business Machine Corp, the Wall Street Journal said.

Tony Fadell, who is a senior vice president of Apple's iPod division and a part of the team involved in the development of the iPhone, is leaving the company citing personal reasons but may remain as a consultant, the paper said, citing people familiar with the matter.

Fadell will be replaced by IBM's Mark Papermaster, the paper said.

[Rumor]

Looks like a US Judge in New York has ordered Papermaster to immediately quit working for Apple.

[The Godfather]

Congrats New York state. Because you enforce non-compete agreements, millions of highly skilled professionals will think twice before going to work within your borders.

Is a boycott of all Made in New York products in order?

So, is Papermaster unemployed today, "until the dust settles"?

[Dork.]

This is the first time I've heard of a non-compete being enforced in New York State, ever. But since there is a hearing scheduled shortly, maybe the judge is just making sure he gives IBM the benefit of the doubt before he unleashes the clue bat on IBM's legal team. Even if Apple now has a semiconductor division that competes directly with IBM, the fact of the mater is that the guy is not working for that division. This is why non-competes are less than useless -- there are so many ways around them.

Everyone knows he's going to head up PA Semi the day after his non-compete expires, but it doesn't matter. Any confidential, competition-sensitive information that the guy knows due to his employment at IBM is protected no matter what by his employment agreement with IBM, no matter whether or not the non-compete agreement is valid. And I'm sure Apple knows this, and is going out of its way to make sure that he doesn't divulge any of that. The best IBM can get out of it is recognition that the guy can't work at Apple for a year. He'll take a year-long sabbatical, and then go head up PA Semi, with a vengeance. If it gets this far, the judge may even force IBM to pay his salary during the sabbatical, since they've basically ensured that he can't practice his trade in any meaningful fashion for a year.

Plus, Is even IBM big enough to deal with the full Wrath of Steve?

[mduell]

Originally Posted by The Godfather 

Congrats New York state. Because you enforce non-compete agreements, millions of highly skilled professionals will think twice before going to work within your borders.

Or will negotiate with their employers for reasonable (time/geography limited, with compensation, etc) non-competes. These are supposedly highly skilled professionals, not minimum wage takers.

[mduell]

According to this time line, IBM did offer Papermaster a years salary for the year he would be under the non-compete.

[linger]

Originally Posted by mduell 

According to this time line, IBM did offer Papermaster a years salary for the year he would be under the non-compete.

Good. So he gets to take a year long vacation, while still helping Apple behind the scenes (what people don't know wont hurt them) and by the time he actually get the job, Apple will be ahead of the curve.

IBM has taken their position in the computer world a bit too much for granted. Especially early on.

They aren't the giant they used to be.

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by mduell 

According to this time line, IBM did offer Papermaster a years salary for the year he would be under the non-compete.

Interesting, I missed that the first time around.

The point is, though, even if Apple intends to make him the head of PA Semi once his non-compete runs out, there's nothing that IBM can do about it. There's nothing sneaky about it on Apple's part, either. The non-compete may not be enforceable, and even if it is it runs out after a year. I'm not sure why IBM is bothering to press its case....

[mduell]

Electronista thinks IBM is concerned about him taking info about racetrack memory (applicable to iPods, etc) to Apple, rather than just the semiconductor design/manufacturing info.

[Dork.]

That may be the case, but he's likely under other agreements with IBM, which actually are enforceable, which would prohibit him from divulging any of those secrets. Anyone in this industry knows that you can't go around blabbing stuff about your former employer, because if you do, future employers won't want to trust you with their secrets.

Suing over a non-compete to preserve trade secrets is pointless, since there are other mechanisms in place to protect those secrets. The lawsuit is hurting IBM more than it's helping. After all, aren't we all talking about IBM's trade secrets on MacNN right now? Would we if IBM never sued over the noncompete?

[Eug]

Originally Posted by mduell 

According to this time line, IBM did offer Papermaster a years salary for the year he would be under the non-compete.

Interesting. That's putting some real meat behind it.

The few times I've seen companies try to invoke this rule on friends, they never offered free money for a year.

That argument that the job as head of the iPod/iPhone division is only a placeholder title seems very odd though. I don't buy it. That division is key to the future development of Apple. Mind you, it would make sense for the head of the iPod/iPhone division to lead the PA Semi takeover, as much of the technology would be directly aimed at the iPod/iPhone.