Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by janrinok on Friday July 04 2014, @08:18PM   Printer-friendly
from the sour-grapes dept.

Last week, Amazon sued Zoltan Szabadi, who worked for Amazon Web Services until May, when he moved to a job working at Google Cloud Platform. The lawsuit, first reported by Geekwire, was filed on June 27 in King County Superior Court in Seattle. Amazon contends that Szabadi is violating the agreement, which calls him to avoid working for any competitors in the "target market" for 18 months after he leaves Amazon. It also bars him from working to hire any Amazon employees for 12 months after leaving.

Szabadi's lawyer told Amazon that his employment with Google does come with restrictions. His contract with Google states that for a period of six months, Szabadi won't be allowed to participate "directly or indirectly" in "sales, marketing, or business development... with or to any customers or strategic partners of your former employer." For the same six-month period, he's barred from assisting with the hiring of any other Amazon employees.

This story is from Ars Technica.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by Adamsjas on Friday July 04 2014, @09:42PM

    by Adamsjas (4507) on Friday July 04 2014, @09:42PM (#64329)

    which calls him to avoid working for any competitors in the "target market" for 18 months after he leaves Amazon

    I've seen terms like this in employee hiring, but most of the time these things are not enforceable when written that broadly.

    You can't take things with you, like code, or customer lists, but blanket provisions usually are not enforceable.
    There is a good write up on this here: http://pandhlaw.com/2011/05/is-your-non-competition-restriction-enforceable/ [pandhlaw.com]

  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by PizzaRollPlinkett on Friday July 04 2014, @10:28PM

    by PizzaRollPlinkett (4512) on Friday July 04 2014, @10:28PM (#64340)

    Although these are technology companies, it's important that this guy is not involved with development, devops, or any other technical aspect of the technology industry. He's some kind of management droid. So I don't know what trade secrets he could take to another company, or how a random management drone could give Google a competitive advantage. This story has nothing to do with the other story about collusion among tech companies not to poach either other's skilled technical talent. This is the technology equivalent of a Wal-Mart manager going to work for Target.

    --
    (E-mail me if you want a pizza roll!)
    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Nerdfest on Saturday July 05 2014, @01:05AM

      by Nerdfest (80) on Saturday July 05 2014, @01:05AM (#64374)

      Even if he is technical, who cares. Sharing secrets is one thing, but if you want to keep people's technical abilities from others, pay them properly and treat them with the respect hey deserve. You can't have it =both ways, treating them like both off-shore-able cogs and the heart of your business.