Monday, June 22, 2009

Should We Make Non-Compete Agreements Illegal in Masssachusetts?

I say yes, in Sunday's Globe column, though as always, I'm curious to hear what you think.

If you want to change the status quo, here are a couple sites to know about:


There were so many great comments that couldn't fit in the story, but just one for the blog from Jeff Anderson, CEO of Quick Hit (and former CEO of Turbine, another local games company mentioned in the column).

"The biggest problem we have as a start-up is attracting and retaining talent. If someone wants to relocate to Massachusetts, they need to feel like if this job doesn't work out, they can find another job. But if non-competes are de rigeur, if not only reduces the number of companies that you have in any given space, like games, but it forces those people to leave." Anderson adds that he has received two or three dozen job applications from talented people working for other games companies in Massachusetts, but says that it would be problematic to hire them because of their non-competes.

"When you think about all the other problems that start-ups have to deal with, from capital and vision to competition, and all the pieces that have to be properly aligned, non-competes just add to that."

Of course, like most companies in Massachusetts, even though Anderson is philosophically against non-competes, he asks employees to sign one, even though he says it is as narrowly-defined as possible.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Foley blogs about non-compete law

My Globe colleague Todd Wallack just called this new blog to my attention: Massachusetts Noncompete Law, published by the law firm Foley Hoag LLP.

Here's blogger Michael Rosen's description of it:

    Foley Hoag’s Massachusetts Noncompete Law Blog focuses on developments in Massachusetts in the areas of covenants not to compete, non-solicitation and non-disclosure agreements, trade secrets and the many related issues that arise when employees move between employers. As court decisions and other legal developments arise, this blog will describe them and discuss their implications for the businesses and individuals affected by them.

    In several of the industries that are significant drivers of the Massachusetts economy—including high technology, life sciences and financial services—employers routinely require employees to sign various types of agreements restricting their activities during and after their employment. As a company’s intellectual property is placed at risk every time a valued employee walks out the door, the movement of talent between companies—particularly competitors—begets litigation. We hope to promote a working dialogue on these developments—post your thoughts and join the discussion.


(Unfortunately, the Alliance for Open Competition blog, run by a group of people who hope to change the way non-competes are enforced in Mass., seems to have gone dormant for half a year.)

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Mid-week links: Convoq closing, Alliance for Open Competition, O Beverages

A couple Wednesday links...

- When I ran into Chris Herot at the Tech Crunch party last month, he told me he was hoping to sell the collaboration company he co-founded, Convoq. It looks like a sale didn't come together, and Chris has posted some reflections on his blog about the five years he invested in trying to get the start-up off the ground. It's thoughtful writing -- and worthy reading.

- Spark Capital and Bijan Sabet are creating a new group, The Alliance for Open Competition to advocate for eliminating non-compete causes in Massachusetts. They're looking for people to sign on in support of the campaign.

- Xconomy reports on a new start-up from Highland Capital Partners' Consumer Fund, O Beverages. The founder is Tom First, one of the two Toms from Nantucket Nectars. O sounds like a new twist on Vitamin Water, which Coke bought for $4 billion earlier this year.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,