RSSJudge: Google Can't Hire Ex-MS Exec
By Ed Oswald | Published July 29, 2005, 11:42 AM
Microsoft has won the first battle in what is set to be a protracted court case that will pit the company against one of its biggest rivals: Google. A Seattle Superior Court judge has said that Microsoft's fears of leaked trade secrets were fair, and barred Google from hiring a former Redmond executive until a full hearing can be held.
Kai-Fu Lee, a former vice president of Microsoft's Interactive Services division accepted a job with Google on July 19. Lee's new role with the search giant would be as head of the company's new Chinese research and development center.
Judge Steven Gonzalez gave Google and Lee one day to surrender any documents or material he may have obtained while at Microsoft, as well as barring the two parties from discussing anything Lee may have learned during his tenure in Redmond.
Gonzalez also took the somewhat unusual step of slapping Lee on the wrist, saying he could not entice any Microsoft employees to join him at Google.
Microsoft had accused Lee and the search giant of attempting to siphon employees away from the company, however there was no hard evidence of either party doing so.
The judge agreed with Microsoft's filings that Lee does in fact know enough to hurt the company's business, and ruled for the software maker. His ruling will stand until a full hearing is held on September 6.
After the hearing, a full trial is tentatively scheduled for January 9, 2006.
According to court documents, Microsoft may be very worried over Google's future moves and this court case could be the first of several attempts to stop the company in its tracks.
In its filings, Google claimed that Lee was told the suit was part of a competitive strategy. "Kai-Fu, Steve (Ballmer) is definitely going to sue you and Google over this," Gates apparently said to Lee on July 15. "He has been looking for something like this, someone at a VP level to go to Google. We need to do this to stop Google."
Microsoft has declined to respond to the statement directly, saying the issue is not any conversation he had with Gates, but rather what he knows and how that could help Google.
Yes... and here's another man's lively hood taken away from him. Probably one of the best jobs a man (with his knowledge) could have asked for and he didn't stop to think, now he's got no job with MS or Google... I know I'd be kicking My Butt!!!
Score: 0
|Well, lets see - we could start a company called Giggle (China), and franchise to Google, and Lee could work for Giggle...
Score: 0
|I wonder will they sue me after saying this: the biggest thief of them all gets his stolen property protected. what irony. by the way, wont this be very pleasing for google to know that MS fears them this much ? I doubt Mr Lee knows how they get away with all the robbery they committed, stealing from IBM, APPLE, COMMODORE, ATARI etc. and GOOGLE is just one of the next generation...
Score: 0
|Woooohooo..
Hahahahahhaha. I bet that feels good doesn't it Google?
It's nice to finally see Google smacked in the nads.
Score: 0
|Dose this mean that If I had a tech job at one company and tried to move to another company, I can't. I think this may have just set a standard for all companies.
What trade secrets is MS holding that we can’t know? Most of there information leeks out any way you look at it.
Score: 0
|"Does this mean that If I had a tech job at one company and tried to move to another company, I can't"
Lee signed a contract stating that he would not work for a compeditor. So unless you signed one of those contracts, which is your posting here, I don't think your job is THAT important, you don't have to be fearful of this.
Score: 0
|More specifically, he signed an agreement that he would not work at a direct competitor performing the same or similar tasks... and his position at Google violates that agreement.
If I'm working at GE Aircraft Engines as an engineer and move to Boeing to work as an engineer, and I signed such an agreement... I'd be in violation. But if I move to, Black & Decker to work as an engineer on Power Tools, then that's fine.
Score: 0
|I too had to sign a similar contract with the company I am working with now. It doesn't mean I can't leave there and work for a similar company; it simply means I agree not to let the second company know how the first one operates...in other words...trade secrets.
Score: 0
|Screw Microsoft. Haven't they stolen from Apple, Netscape, IBM and every software company under this solar system ? What software product has this company actually developed on it's own? DOS ? the biggest theft from Ibm... I hope Google fights back and buries or buys MIcrosoft. let us be rid of a bad apple
Score: 0
|If Google conquered Microsoft they would become just as bad over the long-term. One must hope that one day some new OS will arive from the heavens that will directly compete with Windows, and thus, prices will be reduced for all mankind.
Score: 0
|Linux
Score: 0
|well, from my experience, Linux isn't quite as comparable, though i do see potential. If only it were as easy to install programs on linux as it is on windows and macs. Especially GIMP, looks like a headache from my minor attempts, maybe one day i will dedicate to installing GIMP and see how hard it really was. Actually, I'm quite impressed with how easily Firefox installs. There's a little more than point & click to get java to work in Fx, but not much. I have been using programs on windows that are avail for linux too, so when it is ready, i will be used to the programs - Open Office, GIMP, GAIM, Audacity...
Score: 0
|Stupid Exec...secrets are for MS...
Score: 0
|Especially when it's their secrets.
Score: 0
|Good to see that Microsoft actually won something, they had an agreement with the guy and he tried to run off with trade secrets. Case closed.
Score: 0
|Microsoft should definitely win this case. They have a legitimate case. And the injunction does not mean that he can't work for Google at all, just not on the projects that Microsoft specifies. Definitely sounds right to me.
Score: 0
|so now microsoft has gotten so large and all powerful that not only do laws not apply to them, but they can also dictate the actions of employees in companies they dont own... screw that. If I was google I would base Lee in California to do the china thing as he was hired to do, screw the non-competitiuve agreement which is so much crapper paper in my eyes and put lee to work. Microsoft does NOT write the law, they dont make the law and they arent above the law.
further they can NOT tell anyone, employees or no, what they can and cant do for a living.
Score: 0
|rofl...obviousily people on here do not know anything about contracts... kai-fu lee SIGNED the contract no one forced him to...it stated he could NOT work for another competitor...and he signed anyways...so he knew what he was giving up...microsoft is obeying the law and following suit..they have EVERY LEGAL RIGHT to do what they are doing.
for people that are having issues understanding this and why Microsoft is right.
Contract - A LEGAL BINDING DOCUMENT
Score: 0
|i wonder how much the judge is getting from microsoft.......
Score: 0
|I agree. Now, whether the law should be in place or not is another story, but the law is clear on this issue. Google couldn't win in Seattle.
Score: 0
|And I really don't think that Google should win. MS is clearly protecting it's own within the law. Lee on the other hand is without a job. If it were intentional, what he did, then he got what he deserved.
Score: 0
|If MS wins and the guy cannot be hired by Google, what company will hire him then? No-one because MS will go after them all, 50 years later the guy is still jobless because MS won't allow him to get hired because he knows some MS secrets. lol
Score: 0
|Yes, but you are forgetting one simple fact in this whole situation.
Kai-Fu Lee AGREED to the non compete when he signed the contract with MS. No one held a gun to his head to sign it.
When you have the experience he did and want to start at a large multinational corp a non-compete is a standard (and often expected) part of the deal. He CHOSE to work for MS and CHOSE to sign the contract. If he didn't consider the Law of Unintended Consequences when he signed it, that is his problem.
I have seen people post calling non compete clauses unconstitutional. How can they be unconstitutional when you CHOOSE to sign them?
You are signing a contract that means giving up something of yours in return for the benefits they are offering.
If I have learned one thing in my life it is this: You don't HAVE to do anything. You CHOSE to do something because you want to benefits of taking that action or inaction.
I don't HAVE to go to work everyday. I CHOOSE to go to work because I want the weekly pay check. I don't want to be a bum and live on the streets.
I don't HAVE to obey the law, I CHOOSE to because I don't want to live my life in jail.
He didn't HAVE to sign the contract, he CHOSE to because he wanted the job and wanted the paycheck. He could have walked away and worked at McDonald's.
The courts made the right choice here.
Score: 0
|Enough yelling already! We get the freakin point!
Score: 0
|Microsoft dosen't own the world!!! Kay-Fu Lee is getting hired by google and is going to China! So the all law actions are a way to atack rival Google. Chinese law works diffrent :P
Score: 0
|I believe that a no-competition agreement is held for a specified amount of time, not indefinite. Its up to a 5 years on termination of employment I believe that he cannot work for another like coporation, and up to an indefinite amount of time that he must keep confidentiality of the company, and 5 years that he may not solicit employees from another company, all specified by the agreement itself.
Example of a non-compete document after filling in personal and company information. Try it out. http://www.lawdepot.com/...employ/?ad=confid_intro
Score: 0
|this is very simple and everyone has to go out of their way and go microsoft is a bad company they are the devil blah blah....the fact remains he SIGNED and AGREED to the terms of the contract...its not like microsoft just threw this on him out of nowhere if he read the contract he knew what he was getting...the fact this even went to court is a waste of microsoft's time
Score: 0
|