RSSCourt forces ex-IBMer to leave his job at Apple
By Jacqueline Emigh | Published November 10, 2008, 2:20 PM
A court has forced IBM exec Mark Papermaster to quit his new job at Apple, despite Papermaster's protests that he didn't violate a non-compete clause in his IBM contract.
A federal judge on Friday ordered Mark Papermaster, IBM's former guru of processors and blade servers, to leave his new position as head of engineering for Apple's iPhones and iPods until the dust settles around a suit by IBM accusing him of breaking a non-compete clause in his IBM contract.
Papermaster, however, had argued in court earlier that his acceptance of the Apple job didn't actually violate the clause. He claimed that IBM and Apple haven't been direct competitors since IBM sold its PC business to Lenovo and Apple sold servers to education institutions.
"Until this litigation effort by IBM, aside from the divested IBM personal computer business and a single sale several years ago of Apple's Xserve product to a university, I do not recall a single instance of Apple being described as a competitor of IBM during my entire tenure at IBM," according to his court filing.
At the end of October, IBM filed suit in US District Court for the Southern District of New York arguing that as head of IBM's "elite Integration & Values Team," Papermaster -- an IBM employee for 25 years -- was "privy to a whole host of trade secrets and confidences."
Papermaster's lawyers have asserted that forcing Papermaster "to 'sit out' of the electronics industry for a year would be incredibly damaging to his career."
Apple should quit. That company is just good for making MP3 players
Score: 0
|IBM Sells Servers. Apple Sells Servers. Thats probably why IBM is b****ing. As tiny as Apples share of the Server market is ;)
Could that be considered direct competition just because Apple sells servers? Maybe it could 'become' direct competition if his hiring results in Apple beginnnig to really push themselves in the Server market.
Score: 0
|This is a total bummer.
I'm not a fan of Non-Compete clauses, but he did sign one and I guess it's a legal, binding contract.
Still, I wish that if a company forces a person to stick to that clause, they would have to pay them their full salary until the end of that Non-compete contract period.
At least that would be closer to fair.
Score: 0
|Slavery gets a chance at a come back. But this time it's only the information in your brain.
Score: 0
|Appeal
Score: 0
|In what market does IBM and Apple directly compete? And what products offer direct competition?
IBM doesn't even target the consumer market at all anymore! And heaven knows Apple hasn't even begun to understand, let alone acknowledge, the Enterprise market!
In fact, you could make a case that few companies understand the Enterprise market LESS than Apple! LOL!
Score: 0
|the judge probably has IBM stock.
perhaps, the judge should also be ruling against business's who screw the workers.
so the question is, since when do the federal courts get involve in civil disputes between business's and former employees and that don't involve discrimination.
Score: 0
|It would be more equitable if the companies could provide a list of their competitors before you sign...
Score: 0
|Gotta love those non competes, I've signed 2 of them and over a dozen NDA's in the last five years.
Score: 0
|Maybe he should have thought about the repercussions when signing the contract that said he could not work for a direct competitor for a year. It is a pretty standard thing for execs. to sign anywhere.
Score: 0
|That's the point - Apple and IBM *aren't* direct competitors.
Score: 0
|There are ways around it, he can be a contract "consultant" for a year.
Score: 0
|Maybe not when it comes to desktop or laptops any longer (or mp3 players, lol), but the guy was in charge of making IBM branded server machines and his title at Apple would have been "devices hardware engineering"; even though he was to 'replace' the Ipod innovator - so then, obviously in charge of making next gen ipods/iphones?...you never know what happens behind closed doors - especially at Apple. For all you know, in 2009/10 Apple could suddenly announce the release of Enterprise grade machines and software. 25 years of trade secrets I can only imagine, are a hard, hard thing to let go of....
Score: 0
|You do realize that as far as computers are concerned, 25 years of trade secrets are not exactly very important, right? Heck, most of the technological stuff he's had access to is likely to be considered obsolete in 2-3 years. Had he been a Coca-Cola employee getting a job at Pepsico, I'd understand. But in this case, it's an absolutely ridiculous attitude from the IBM camp. They are most likely more concerned about setting an example for former employees than concerned with anything he might actually have had access to. Unless, of course, IBM has plans that will revolutionize the computer market in the next few years.
Score: 0
|