This is pretty interesting. If it says what I think it does, it could pay off for people who had contracts with studios, etc.
+ +
[nq:1]Non-Compete Clauses Thrown Out In California > from the what-thou-wilt dept. > posted by kdawson on Friday August 08, @11:45 (The Courts) >
http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/08/08/1335253>+ +[/nq]
drfuchs writes "If you signed an employment agreement in California,(0) any non-compete clause in it is null & (void*), says the state Supreme Court of California ((1)ruling PDF). Better still, the San Francisco Chronicle opines that the US Federal courts are likely to fall in line with the decision in the way they interpret California law. (Most other states still have non-compete laws on the books and it's not clear this ruling will affect them.) Turns out it wasn't a high-tech case at all, but a CPA who had worked for the accounting firm Arthur Anderson (now disgraced due to their complicity in the Enron case)."
Discuss this story at:
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=08/08/08/1335253Links:
0.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/07/BAUH12716R.D TL&tsp=1
1.
http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147190.PDF