Re:The case for banning non-competes
by mathattack on Friday July 16, 2021 @11:49AM
(#27857542)
It’s a good reason to keep quiet. :-)
What’s interesting about the first case you cite is those types of NDAs help individual companies but hurt the ecosystem.
Wherever there’s a large grouping of world class firms, they benefit in aggregate from cross-pollination. Think NYC for banking and advertising, CA and Seattle for tech, Houston for energy, Etc. One reason people can chase the best ideas in CA is non-competes aren’t enforceable. But in any individual case someone leaving hurts the firm they were previous employed at. So firms still push for non-competes.
What’s interesting about the first case you cite is those types of NDAs help individual companies but hurt the ecosystem.
Wherever there’s a large grouping of world class firms, they benefit in aggregate from cross-pollination. Think NYC for banking and advertising, CA and Seattle for tech, Houston for energy, Etc. One reason people can chase the best ideas in CA is non-competes aren’t enforceable. But in any individual case someone leaving hurts the firm they were previous employed at. So firms still push for non-competes.