I don't know how to word it, but a company that ignores all content rights enforcing a non compete seems ironic to me.

Aren’t those non enforceable now?

Might still be enforceable at this level.

Hypothetically: Could someone play for both the Los Angeles Lakers and Golden State Warriors? Something tells me those non competes are unenforceable.

Isnt those just branches of the same company?

You can have contracts within a company.

Now I'm curious how the NBA is structured. I always thought the "ownership" was who paid the players and signed the contracts (in essence, an NBA team is a company), and the NBA simply enforced the rules of the contracts (the "templating", if you will), but I'm sure it's much more complex than that. I made the analogy because NBA players often move from team to team and there are no non-competes keeping them from playing for another team.

Maybe the NBA is a franchise and each team a franchisee?

Not really a thing in CA, largely unenforceable.

Thanks for pointing that out, I didn't know it. What about NDAs?