this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
228 points (100.0% liked)

news

23451 readers
758 users here now

Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.

Rules:

-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --

-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --

-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --

-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --

-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--

-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--

-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --

-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 420blazeit69@hexbear.net 22 points 5 months ago (1 children)

And companies kept using them anyway, because how many employees know it's unenforceable, or would be able to fight a much larger company trying to enforce it?

I'm expecting more of the same here.

[–] SacredExcrement@hexbear.net 11 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Yeah...the wording of 'nearly all' non competes being voided worries me as well. I wonder if we'll just see corporations weasel a way around this to keep using them

[–] PKMKII@hexbear.net 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

From the official FTC release it looks like existing NCAs for senior executives are still enforceable but new ones can’t be written.

Really curious if this ruling applies to public employers as well as private.

[–] SacredExcrement@hexbear.net 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I finally got curious and went digging, looks like public and private; at least, I don't see anything distinguishing between the two in either this text or the proposed rule

Also looks like the two conservative chairs voted against the rule lmao, shocking

Ed, I did find this in the finalized rule under part E, Sect 1 , 'Generally'

For example, the Act exempts “banks” and “persons, partnerships, or corporations insofar as they are subject to the Packers and Stockyards Act.” And the Act excludes from its definition of “corporation” any entity that is not “organized to carry on business for its own profit or that of its members.” The NPRM explained that, where an employer is exempt from coverage under the FTC Act, the employer would not be subject to the rule. The NPRM also explained that State and local government entities—as well as some private entities—may not be subject to the rule when engaging in activity protected by the State action doctrine.

So probably just certain contractors/researchers could still be bound by NDAs under this ruling, likely ones for government work (as mentioned below)

[–] ProfessorOwl_PhD@hexbear.net 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I suspect it's an exception for matters of national security, ie the MIC.

[–] SacredExcrement@hexbear.net 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Wouldn't that typically be an NDA, not a non-compete?

[–] ProfessorOwl_PhD@hexbear.net 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Generally, I'm thinking of the scientists and engineers that do the researching and designing, where it's not just that the company doesn't want them to blab about their internal secrets, but the government also doesn't want them using that knowledge for a foreign competitor.

[–] SacredExcrement@hexbear.net 4 points 5 months ago

That's a fair point