Re: Informix vs Oracle, alleged trade secret theft

I want to inject my $.02 worth. I am drawing on a lot of experience here. I have worked for over 12 companies in the last thirty years. Including my attempt at self employment. While Mr. Segel has a point, that being industrial espionage is alive and well, it is also true that you have to be able to sleep at night with yourself. By this I mean personally it would bother me a great deal to sell an idea to a former employers' competitor and sell myself in the process. So I wouldn't do it. However, I do not want to sign something that says I can't. Anyone in someone else's employ owes allegiance to that entity. That includes not giving up their secrets, but I have had companies go bankrupt underneath me while I was dilligently working. Three times as a matter of fact. I thought I could tell when it was coming after the first time. I couldn't. To me this has nothing to do with the law. It is a personal integrity problem. Since people are willing to sell their souls for baubles the problem exists. Further, I don't for instance think that companies are so loyal that they are not going to let you go if push comes to shove. As for the company paying for my training and education, yes they do. It is part of my compensation package and the fact that I don't know what they do so I have to learn it. If they don't want me to learn it, then they should not hire. I do not like having training thrown up in my face. But they do hire and the reason is because of the skills and knowledge I possess. Skills and knowledge gained in others employ. I want to use those skills and knowledge. I want to sell them. I don't sell the trade secrets. ---------- } From: netac <netac@worldnet.att.net> } To: informix-list@rmy.emory.edu } Subject: Re: Informix vs Oracle, alleged trade secret theft } Date: Monday, February 03, 1997 13:21 } } Mike Segel wrote: } } > Trader-Vic a competitor wants to know how Trader-X does it. In the end, } > Trader-Vic finds out I am the guy, so they want to hire me. I have } > a non-compete clause with Trader-X. Can I go to work for Trader-Vic? } > After all, they promised me Jenny McCarthy along with the penthouse } > on Mag Mile ;-) } > } > The answer is maybe. State laws control contracts. Illinois is a right } > to work state. This means that a former employer can not stop me } > from working in my profession. It all depends on how the contract } > was written. If the clause is too repressive, the courts *may* say the } > clause is too restrictive and violates my right to work. But if the } > contract blocks me from working for a direct competitor for a period } > of time, then the courts will allow it as a valid clause. } > } > However in my scenario, I can't since Trader-Vic is a direct compettitor } > and Trader-X has paid me to create a program which gives them a } > compettive edge. They own the intellectual property or trade secret. } > } > You have to remember that they paid you to learn and do the research } > to develop the product, hence they have a right to that product. } > After all, your knowledge was gained through collaberation. The laws } > are there to help protect a company's investment and recoupe their } > expenses. } > } > Just my $.02 worth. } > } Well, what you are saying then is that Trader-X, for the very fact that } you developed your skills/knowledge while in their employment, now owns } all future rights to your skill because you are admitting that you can't } go work for Trader-VIC under almost any circumstance since they do the } same work. Lets say then that your only skill in life was that } developed while you were working at Trader X. With your logic, you } either have to stay with Trader X forever under any salary treament they } want to give you, or drive a taxi for a living?