« What steps should be taken to prevent a Chinese joint venture partner from appropriating the U.S. partner's IP, including trade secrets? | Main | Patent or Padlock: Patents and Trade Secrets Form the Heart of an Effective IP Strategy »

Spark Capital’s Bijan Sabet Says Cross Out Those Non-Compete Clauses—An Xconomy Interview

Wade Roush

The non-compete agreement. When people ponder the reasons for Silicon Valley’s surge as a startup haven—often leaving New England licking its wounds, as it did after student venture Facebook’s departure for Palo Alto, for example—they often point to the persistence of this little clause in many New England-area employment agreements as a major contributor.

The clauses are meant to prevent a company’s ex-employees from starting similar businesses that could undermine it in the marketplace. In California, courts have held that they’re unenforceable. In Massachusetts, they’re still quite common—and there’s widespread agreement that they hold back entpreneurship. Yet many big companies favor the clauses, and years of lobbying to have them outlawed in the state have come to naught.

About

This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on December 3, 2007 1:34 AM.

The previous post in this blog was What steps should be taken to prevent a Chinese joint venture partner from appropriating the U.S. partner's IP, including trade secrets?.

The next post in this blog is Patent or Padlock: Patents and Trade Secrets Form the Heart of an Effective IP Strategy.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.