Microsoft has barred one of its ex executives from working at Google, so says C|Net:
A judge has temporarily barred a former Microsoft executive hired by Google from performing any duties at the search giant similar to those he performed at Microsoft.
Washington state Superior Court Judge Steven Gonzalez on Thursday granted Microsoft’s request for a temporary restraining order to prevent Kai-Fu Lee from violating his noncompete agreement.
Google announced on July 19 that it had hired Lee to lead a new research and development center in China and serve as president of its Chinese operations. Lee was previously a vice president at Microsoft and played a key role in its operations in China. He also led development of some of its search technologies, Microsoft’s lawsuit claims.
The same day that Google announced its new hire, Microsoft sued Lee, claiming he was breaking a one-year noncompete agreement by joining Google. Microsoft also sued Google, accusing it of encouraging Lee to violate promises made to Microsoft. Two days later, Google asked a California court to declare Microsoft’s noncompete provision invalid.
Google and Lee claim that Lee would not be doing anything at Google that would compete with work he did at Microsoft, and Lee says he contacted Google and was not recruited.
Specifically, Gonzalez prohibited Lee from working on search technologies, business strategies, planning or development related to the computer search market in China, as well as any other areas he worked in while employed at Microsoft.
This is a tricy one. You can’t have people disclosing company secrets to the competition, but a guy’s gotta make a living. If all noncompete agreements were to be taken literally you couldn’t work anywhere in or near the internet business.
Related Articles
Google Is Where Microsoft Was 20 Years Ago
Who Could Be Next On Googles Shopping List?
Google Launches Personalized Homepage
Google suggest reverse engineered
2 responses so far ↓
John Roberts // Jul 29, 2005 at 7:28 pm
I’d encourage you to actually link to the article from which you quote so liberally. Thanks. http://linking.news.com/ has more thoughts on this.
John Roberts
CNET News.com product development
AlRayyes // Jul 29, 2005 at 7:40 pm
Sorry about that, it wasn’t intentional. If you look at the other posts you’ll see we always link to the original article and make it obvious what’s quoted and what’s not.
Anyway, the mistake’s been rectified
Leave a Comment