The AMD Execution Thread [2007 - 2017]

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not saying he's breaching contract. I'm saying it's pathetic and dumb to sue over it because it will most definitely back-fire for future hiring.

As opposed to having the rest of your employees think that it's fair game to poach others when they leave? I think most companies realise what the safe bet is.

I'm all for employee rights btw, but deliberately breaking a *fair* contract leaves them open to every lawsuit that comes their way. None of these people need these other people to do their jobs - or maybe they do? Maybe that's why? So by getting one guy Nvidia gets them all. That's why the contracts don't allow it.
 
As opposed to having the rest of your employees think that it's fair game to poach others when they leave?
Exactly.

I think most companies realise what the safe bet is.
That's why these kind of lawsuits are incredibly rare: companies who need to compete for talent, we're not talking Walmart here, know better than to alienate candidates with this kind of stupidity.

It's a sign of desperation. Do you want to work for a company that's this desperate?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Exactly.


That's why these kind of lawsuits are incredibly rare: companies who need to compete for talent, we're not talking Walmart here, know better than to alienate candidates with this kind of stupidity.

It's a sign of desperation. Do you want to work for a company that's this desperate?

If AMD had just let this go you and another 20 people here would be slagging them off for being too soft, and extrapolating why this is exactly why they are a failed company.

I am enjoying this lawsuit because it shows how AMD isn't as incompetent as many believe. They have "lost" 4 traitorous individuals to Nvidia - either Nvidia knew about it or they gained 4 undesirable people. That's a long way removed from "desperation" as you put it. AMD has nothing to lose and everything to gain from this point onwards.
 
I think suing for stealing secrets is exactly what they should do.

Losing 4 employees? They've been laying off by the truckload. There is no better way to nudge the remaining people into start going on 'doctor appointments'. No poaching required.
 
This reflects badly on everyone involved.

It remains to be seen if AMD suffered some direct grievous harm from these individuals. If they did not, then I think the lawsuit may be a mistake. If they did, then I hope they win.

They allege in the suit they have suffered considerable harm, some irreparable. However, the only specific result they cite is money and/or property.

If they won the contracts with the parties involved and are going to claim they are not going to make as much money as they could have, those are pretty dark waters to tread.

If they lost contracts with the parties cited, it is more understandable.
 
The primary harm a corporation can sustain is in terms of money and property, and that is what the civil suit would concern itself with. There would be more once the suit progresses, and possibly more if criminal charges are filed.
Smaller document thefts have already been valued at astronomical sums.

I hope to see a timeline at some point with regards to all four employees, their employment, and the alleged violations.
The suit lumps Hagen in, but does not do anything in terms of document theft on his part.

Is AMD out to do as much damage as possible to everyone potentially involved?
If it has lumped Hagen in with the same group that has copied trade secrets, is there a reason why it wouldn't say there is a compelling reason to limit what Hagen can do with his data? A lack of concrete device IDs?
Is AMD hoping for more after scouring the data of the other three defendants, is the evidence that weak against Hagen and AMD that petty, or does AMD know Hagen's machines are already locked down?
 
I talk to former colleagues all the time. I have give the résumé of former colleagues into whoever was my employer at the time. I have nudged disgruntled former colleagues/friends into switching jobs. Other than fresh from college hiring, personal contacts is the most common way to hire people and very often that includes former colleagues. Just the hint that a company is willing to sue for this in the incestuous environment of the Valley is deadly.

If you're in CA, you and they have nothing to worry about. Non-compete and non-solicit are not legal/enforceable.
http://www.dwt.com/advisories/Calif...n_Agreements_Under_California_Law_08_13_2008/

Unfortunately for the 4 in this case, they work and live in MA, where both are legal and enforceable.
http://www.massbar.org/publications...noncompetition-agreements-recent-developments

If you move to MA, you should be careful not to nudge former colleagues into switching jobs because you might also be sued. Stay in CA and you'll be fine, legally.

It doesn't even look like AMD is trying to enforce the non-compete, just the non-solicit.

With that being said, the documents and emails sound like a far bigger deal than the solicitation.
 
I say put pressure on the guy who googled how to transfer massive numbers of company files while at work.
If he searched that stuff, AMD's probably got his depraved porn habits on record, too.

On a more serious note:

At this point, it seems likely criminal procedings are on the way. However, the timeline for the AMD-Intel theft case shows that a final verdict might not come for years.
The civil suit may enter new territory relative to that case, because it seems AMD is going to put forward the narrative that former executives conspired to take data and were trying to poach their team out from under AMD.
 
Misappropriation of trade secrets is a crime.

In the previously mentioned case where an Intel engineer copied documents when he went over to AMD, the defendant got a prison sentence.
At least three of the defendants were cited in those terms.
Hagen was not, at least not yet.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, but what state law applies here?

Found what I was looking for:

A. Criminal penalties

General Laws chapter 266, section 30(4) provides that "[w]hoever steals, or with intent to defraud obtains by a false pretense, or whoever unlawfully, and with intent to steal or embezzle, converts, secretes, unlawfully takes, carries away, conceals or copies with intent to convert any trade secret of another, regardless of value, whether such trade secret is or is not in his possession at the time of such conversion or secreting, shall be guilty of larceny…."

A person convicted of violating this statute can be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine of not more than twenty-five thousand dollars and imprisonment for not more than two years.

Although this statute provides for severe penalties for the theft of trade secrets, it does not appear to be widely used in comparison to the number of civil case involving allegations concerning misuse of trade secrets. The reasons for the relative lack of use of this statue may include: the higher standards required to obtain a criminal conviction as opposed to a civil judgment; the length of time involved in the criminal process; and the reluctance of businesses and prosecutors to utilize the criminal system for what appear to be civil business disputes.

The criminal process may be a useful route in situations where there is a theft or embezzlement in the traditional sense, such as when a third person literally steals or obtains by false pretence secret information of a company and the civil process may not provide a sufficient deterrent or remedy.

A corporation that decides to seek criminal redress should be careful to ensure that it has a solid case. Furthermore, counsel for the corporation in such a situation must take particular care not to violate Disciplinary Rule 3.4(h), which states that a lawyer shall not "present, participate in presenting, or threaten to present criminal or disciplinary charges solely to obtain an advantage in a private civil matter…."

Interestingly enough, while searching for the above, I came across this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_v._Papermaster
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Some might notice that some posts have disappeared. They have been taken to their rightful place in RSPC. This thread is about AMD being gloomy:p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top