News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The case for banning non-competes by throwawaycities on Friday July 16, 2021 @12:36PM (#27858048)
Well we have never had to sue anyone because no one has ever actually called our bluff when we send them a threatening demand/cease and desist letter from our lawyers.

So if you decide to call our bluff in the future just know we won’t sue you…because we don’t have to sue, our agreement makes you waive your right to have the case heard by a court in lieu of mediation by a mediator of our choosing, from a mediation company we send all our cases to.

Re:The case for banning non-competes by TeMPOraL on Friday July 16, 2021 @06:04PM (#27861754)
> makes you waive your right to have the case heard by a court in lieu of mediation by a mediator of our choosing

This really should be made explicitly illegal. It should not be possible for an individual to surrender the right to bring a dispute in front of the court.

Re:The case for banning non-competes by blunte on Friday July 16, 2021 @07:02PM (#27862141)
Who contributes most to politicians - individuals, or corporations and PACs funded by non-listed corps?

And actually, who writes a significant part of new bills, some of which become laws? Yes, corps. It's not surprising then that the legal system has some extra benefits for the corporations.