w3wilkes;635363 Wrote: 
> Come on, in October it will be 5 years since Logitech bought Slim. I
> doubt you could have a infinite non-compete clause that would hold up
> in any court. And has Logitech really taken the Slim Device line up
> anywhere beyond where Slim was when Logitech acquired it?
I made my comment in response to the aspect of your comment I quoted
that I disagreed with. It wasn't intended to address the specific
situation with this company and its few key principals.

In most acquisitions it's important to tie up key personnel one way or
another for some period, so that they don't set up shop across the
street and hire the employees. That was done in this case partially
with a contingent earn-out provision that ran a few years. (The
contract was publicly released because of Logitech's status as an SEC
registrant).

The transition having past, and with technology confidentiality and
non-use provisions, it's likely the few concerned are now free to
pursue other things that might be competitive but without use of the
"technology" owned by Logitech. They may have already started their
next adventure. 

The way to get around the non-compete problem when the permitted
exceptions don't apply is to give such people employment contracts that
pay an appropriate salary, require exclusivity (can't pursue other
employment or compete with the company), and then tell them to stay
home. Perfectly acceptable under the law.


-- 
Goodsounds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goodsounds's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14201
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=87951

_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Reply via email to