Re: Informix vs Oracle, alleged trade secret theft

On Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:54:33 GMT, Nils.Myklebust_at_idg.no (Nils Myklebust) wrote:

>I spesifically do not want to take this discussion about the
>philosophical (ethical) issues much further her in c.d.i. Although it
>affects us all there is a limit to how far we should discuss this kind
>of topic here in a technical newsgroup. Other facts about this case
>are of course interesting.
>All I will say therefore is that I agree with a some of what Christian
>wrote and disagree with most. Now beeing an employer have nothing to
>do with this. I had the same opinions when I for many years where an
>employee. Check your premises and you may see it.
>
>Hope this ends it. Otherwise it should definitly be taken offline.
>
>
>csimich_at_mail.ue.com.au (Christian Simich) wrote:
>
>:On Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:42:12 GMT, Nils.Myklebust_at_idg.no (Nils
>:Myklebust) wrote:
>:
>:>netac <netac_at_worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>:>
>:>:Larry Baker wrote:
>:>:>
>:>:> Yomama Sophat wrote:
>:>:> > 1) Who's in the right?
>:>:> > 2) Who will win in the end?
>:>:> > 3) Who's got the better technology?
>:>:>
>:>:
>:>: These cases are very scary. Unless the case is about specific theft of
>:>:software or intellectual property, I could see the point. However, more
>:>:and more tech companies are moving forward with these suits as if to say
>:>:they own the minds of their engineers and they are not free to go
>:>:forward and take a better job for a better offer. Its disgusting, and
>:>:as technical professionals we should all be very concerned about this.
>:>:The work I do for my company belongs to them, but my mind belongs to me
>:>:and so do my skills and I can sell them to the highest bidder. I think
>:>:this point gets lost in the discussion sometimes.
>:>
>:>I am sorry, but it is an essential feature of a free country that you
>:>can write the type of contract that you want to. If you can't you are
>:>not free.
>:>Also if I employ someone for advanced development work I would
>:>normally write a contract that they couldn't do competitive work for
>:>some time after the emploiment was terminated. I would assume Informix
>:>have something like this as well.
>:>Your mind and your knowledge clearly belongs to you with the exception
>:>that you can't break a contract. It would often say you shouldn't take
>:>the knowledge you have gain during an emploiment and give it to a
>:>competior. It doesn't realy matter whether you bring disks, paper or
>:>your own memory with you to that competitor.
>:>
>:>Of course you are also free to not sign such a contract, and then
>:>probably have to go somewhere else for emploiment. You chose. Nobody
>:>else can or should make such a decision for you.
>:>
>:>If you say that emploiers shouldn't be allowed to demand contracts of
>:>the above type you shackel emploiers and you have the start of a non
>:>free country which will one day fire back at you very hard.
>:>
>:>The whole issue then resolves arround the contracts these emploiees
>:>have written with Informix.
>:>Another issue is that the judicial system in the US have been all but
>:>broken by a long series of bad lawmaking and not very good practicing
>:>in the courts. This makes it very unclear what contracts can be upheld
>:>in the courts.
>:>
>:>
>:>Nils.Myklebust_at_idg.no
>:>NM Data AS, P.O.Box 9090 Gronland, N-0133 Oslo, Norway
>:>My opinions are those of my company
>:>The Informix FAQ is at http://www.iiug.org
>:
>:
>:I have to respond to Nils here because I feel very strongly about the
>:subject and Nils raised very interesting issues here.
>:
>:I am not engaging into 'flaming' here because I understand where is
>:Nils coming from; the employers are at risk that some or significant
>:know-how may leave the company when a critical person moves to the
>:competitor.
>:
>:The problem is that what Nils states as the 'freedom', in this case a
>:CORPORATE FREEDOM to structure the contracts in certain ways, goes
>:against the PERSONAL FREEDOM - to go and work for whomever one wants
>:to.
>:
>:Not everyone is lucky or capable enough to start and work for their
>:own business. If that was the case, we would not discuss this. There
>:will be no employees to sign the contracts.
>:
>:Luckily, I suspect that this kind of contract, even if signed by a
>:person, may not be binding in some countries. If anyone from
>:Australia is reading this, could you comment please.
>:
>:I heard of a ridiculous case of contracts in USA where the employees
>:of some food chain company had to sign that, from memory, they will
>:not work for a competitor in 10 miles radius from any of the outlets
>:of their current company. It proved, that being a big chain, present
>:in many spots, these radii would cover viruatlly the whole town in
>:an area.
>:
>:I agree that theoretically one does not have to sign the contract and
>:may look elsewhere for the job. In practice, if many companies start
>:putting this type of clauses in, there would be no practical choice.
>:
>:No offence Nils, but would you argue for the FREEDOM to buy slaves?
>:
>:These contracts are almost like the old feudal laws, if you ask me.
>:
>:As a final word, the area is hard, and both employees and employers
>:need to be protected.
>:
>: If an employee has not stolen anything in from the company, the
>:knowledge itself should not make a great difference. There is much
>:more to commercial success these days then just the knowledge in one's
>:head: Marketing, sales channels, QA, productivity and strong
>:financial backing worked many times for the inferior technologies.
>:
>:After all, who can stop a former or disgruntled employee doing a
>:'brain dump', over a cup of coffee, to someone working for a
>:competitor?
>:
>:Contracts cannot replace the ethics, and believe it or not, many
>:people are still strongly guided by this kind of old-fashioned
>:feeling.
>:
>:
>:
>:--
>:Christian Simich, Melbourne, Australia
>:
>:All opinions and statements expressed in this forum are mine
>:and mine only and should not be attributed to my current
>:employer or interpreted as support to any commercial
>:interests.
>
>Nils.Myklebust_at_idg.no
>NM Data AS, P.O.Box 9090 Gronland, N-0133 Oslo, Norway
>My opinions are those of my company
>The Informix FAQ is at http://www.iiug.org

After some deliberation, I decided to respond to Nils. I appreciate his view that he does not want to carry the discussion further. And I am not going to take that discussion further.

The reason for response is Nils' comment that this is not a forum for the "philosophical (ethical) issues".

Many in this thread have been addressing the non-technical issues (to my delight). Even Nils' article, what prompted me to respond, used the word 'free' several times, including the 'free country'. His and most of the other articles addressed legal, political, economical and I guess "philosophical (ethical) issues". I believe it's OK.

Professionals should discuss these issues, and the technical forums are where we 'meet'. Actually, this thread proved to be quiet popular.

 I'd like to see the comments on what others think about using technical forums for non-technical, yet vital issues for the professionals.

Regards,

Christian

PS

Nils,

I spent one of best 8 months of my life in Norway and Denmark. Lovely countries and even lovelier people. And most tolerant I ever met.

So I hope you would put up with my mischief of answering (on a somewhat different topic) and would not get too frustrated :-)

Planning to go to Scandinavia in cc 6 months, we could possibly have a cup of coffee and discuss the topic further ;-)

--
Christian Simich, Melbourne, Australia

All opinions and statements expressed in this forum are mine
and mine only and should not be attributed to my current 
employer or interpreted as support to any commercial 
interests.