Posts tagged Agreement
What’s Behind the eBay-Intuit Anti-Compete Agreement?
Nov 21st
Last week, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against eBay for a non-competition agreement it had signed with Intuit. The agreement prevents either company from trying to hire someone from the other’s staff. According to the Associated Press, the federal suit says Meg Whitman, former CEO of eBay (now CEO at HP) and Scott Cook, Intuit founder, were involved in forming and enforcing the agreement. It was in place from 2006 to 2009.
Intuit was not named in the lawsuit because it had already been listed in a suit and settlement from September 2010 over a series of similar agreements with other companies (Apple, Adobe, Google, Intel and Pixar) not to hire each other’s employees. The current eBay case grew from the 2010 one, but is being treated as a separate suit.
Competition Doesn’t Hurt, But Limiting Opportunity Does
Tech companies are in constant competition when trying to find qualified people to work for them. Acting Assistant Attorney General Joseph Waylan said in the DOJ’s press release that the department believes eBay violated antitrust laws by entering into this agreement because it “eliminated a significant form of competition to the detriment of affected employees who were likely deprived of access to better job opportunities and salaries.”
By preventing Intuit, or any competitor, from trying to hire their employees, eBay is trying to limit the options for its employees and thus reduce their leverage. This means employees might not be able to negotiate raises or better benefits because there are fewer places for them to go if their requests aren’t met.
Bad Practice, Good Business?
These agreements are illegal, and clearly hurt employees. But it’s easy to understand why companies are tempted. After all, in most states, companies are allowed to develop these kinds of agreements directly with their employees, if not with other companies. They see this as a way of protecting an investment. Employers put a lot of money into training employees, not to mention the access given to confidential information and relationships. Non-compete agreements help prevent that investment from benefiting a competitor.
Michael P. Elkon, a labor attorney with Fisher & Phillips LLP, says that knowing who the winners and losers are in these kinds of agreements is up for debate. On the one hand, these agreements can be seen as depressing wages and preventing the “cross-pollination of ideas.” On the other hand, “They allow companies to protect their investments in employees and thereby create a more business-friendly climate.” He noted that in 2009 Georgia passed a statue that made the law more favorable for the enforcement of this kind of contract. But right now, Massachusetts is considering a bill that will do the exact opposite, making the contracts harder to enforce.
In California, non-compete contracts between employers and employees is prohibited, except in limited circumstances. That could be one reason for companies to make anti-competitive deals with others in their industry. California State Attorney General Kamala Harris is filing a State lawsuit – separate from the federal one – based on the State’s stronger protection against anti-competitive agreements.
Image courtesy of Shutterstock.
View full post on ReadWrite
Does Apple’s New Lightning Connector Skirt EU Environmental Agreement?
Sep 17th
Apple seems to be following the letter of the law of a 2009 European Union agreement designed to reduce environmental waste by standardizing its iPhone connectors to Micro-USB. But does the iPhone 5′s new Lightning connector comply with the spirit of the agreement?
The 2009 agreement specifically urges signatories to make sure that every mobile phone sold within the European Union be charged with a common charger. The common platform the phones would use would be Micro-USB, specifically Micro-USB configured with the 2009 CENELEC EN 62684 and ETSI EN 301489-34 standards.
By 2011, pretty much every major phone maker – including Apple – had signed the agreement, committing the companies to Micro-USB as a power-charging standard. So, with the new iPhone 5, where is Micro-USB?
For EU customers, it turns out, it will be in the form of a special Lightning to Micro USB adapter, available for an optional purchase in EU-based Apple stores. This will enable users with Micro-USB chargers to still use them for their new iPhone 5.
And, apparently, this is all kosher with the letter of the agreement:
“In order that compatibility of as many Mobile Phones as possible with a Common EPS may be enabled, if a manufacturer makes available an Adaptor from the Micro-USB connector of a Common EPS to a specific non-Micro-USB socket in the Mobile Phone, it shall constitute compliance to this article,” the memorandum states.
Apple’s new Lightning connector is facing resistance in the United States as well: See iPhone 5′s Lightning Connector Is A Bigger Deal Than Apple Thinks.
What Is Apple’s Plan?
There may be a couple of problems with this interpretation. First, the cost of the adapter is non-zero, which puts an interesting pressure on iPhone 5 customers: just use the included Lightning power/connection cord or pay extra for an adapter to keep a hold of the Micro-USB cord they already have?
It’s a non-trivial cost, too: in the UK, the adapter runs £15, and in Germany the cost is 19€, which is around US $24-25, depending on the exchange rates. That’s a lot of money to plunk down just to keep from switching cords, especially when the Lightning cord is already in hand.
Apple’s pricing seems geared to drive people to make the switch over to Lightning and leave all those other connections behind. Apple’s charging about twice as much for the Lightning to Micro-USB adapters as the older 30-pin to Micro-USB adapters, which run £8 and 8€ in the UK and Germany, respectively. And here in the US? Not available in the US Apple store as of this writing, so you’d have to order one and have it shipped.
The second issue with the adapters is that they will actually create more waste than simply shifting over to Micro-USB standard, since now there are adapters being built that otherwise would not have had to be used. Sure, you can use your old USB charger, but what happens to the Lightning cord that came in the iPhone 5 box? And that’s just in the EU: in the US, a lot of old 30-pin cords are going to get tossed out. Ideally, they’ll be caught in Apple’s or a community recycling program, but not always.
So why not just make the switch to Micro-USB? Besides the business rationale of being able to manage which peripherals will get connected to the iPhone (and presumably future) iOS devices, Apple has it’s technical reasons as well.
Why Apple Doesn’t Love Micro-USB
“The micro USB pins are very small, and the power-carrying connectors, pins 1 and 5, are rated to carry 1.8 amps at 5 volts DC. That means that the maximum charging power that can safely flow across the connector is 9 watts. But the iPad wants 10 watts to charge. It will charge on as little as 5 watts, the output of most USB 3 ports and the specially modified USB 2 ports on newer Apple products, but needs 10 watts for fastest charging,” according to industry observer Steve Wildman.
With this approach, Apple still remains in compliance with its agreement in the EU. But given the net positive waste this solution will create and the recent hijinks Apple performed with the EPEAT compliance list for its MacBook products, Apple’s commitment to environmental issues appears to be getting weaker with each new product release.
View full post on ReadWriteWeb
Apple’s New Lightning Connector Skirts EU Environmental Agreement
Sep 17th
Apple seems to be following the letter of the law of a 2009 European Union agreement designed to reduce environmental waste by standardizing its iPhone connectors to Micro-USB. But does the iPhone 5′s new Lightning connector comply with the spirit of the agreement?
The 2009 agreement specifically urges signatories to make sure that every mobile phone sold within the European Union be charged with a common charger. The common platform the phones would use would be Micro-USB, specifically Micro-USB configured with the 2009 CENELEC EN 62684 and ETSI EN 301489-34 standards.
By 2011, pretty much every major phone maker – including Apple – had signed the agreement, committing the companies to Micro-USB as a power-charging standard. So, with the new iPhone 5, where is Micro-USB?
For EU customers, it turns out, it will be in the form of a special Lightning to Micro USB adapter, available for an optional purchase in EU-based Apple stores. This will enable users with Micro-USB chargers to still use them for their new iPhone 5.
And, apparently, this is all kosher with the letter of the agreement:
“In order that compatibility of as many Mobile Phones as possible with a Common EPS may be enabled, if a manufacturer makes available an Adaptor from the Micro-USB connector of a Common EPS to a specific non-Micro-USB socket in the Mobile Phone, it shall constitute compliance to this article,” the memorandum states.
Apple’s new Lightning connector is facing resistance in the United States as well: See iPhone 5′s Lightning Connector Is A Bigger Deal Than Apple Thinks.
What Is Apple’s Plan?
There may be a couple of problems with this interpretation. First, the cost of the adapter is non-zero, which puts an interesting pressure on iPhone 5 customers: just use the included Lightning power/connection cord or pay extra for an adapter to keep a hold of the Micro-USB cord they already have?
It’s a non-trivial cost, too: in the UK, the adapter runs £15, and in Germany the cost is 19€, which is around US $24-25, depending on the exchange rates. That’s a lot of money to plunk down just to keep from switching cords, especially when the Lightning cord is already in hand.
Apple’s pricing seems geared to drive people to make the switch over to Lightning and leave all those other connections behind. Apple’s charging about twice as much for the Lightning to Micro-USB adapters as the older 30-pin to Micro-USB adapters, which run £8 and 8€ in the UK and Germany, respectively. And here in the US? Not available in the US Apple store as of this writing, so you’d have to order one and have it shipped.
The second issue with the adapters is that they will actually create more waste than simply shifting over to Micro-USB standard, since now there are adapters being built that otherwise would not have had to be used. Sure, you can use your old USB charger, but what happens to the Lightning cord that came in the iPhone 5 box? And that’s just in the EU: in the US, a lot of old 30-pin cords are going to get tossed out. Ideally, they’ll be caught in Apple’s or a community recycling program, but not always.
So why not just make the switch to Micro-USB? Besides the business rationale of being able to manage which peripherals will get connected to the iPhone (and presumably future) iOS devices, Apple has it’s technical reasons as well.
Why Apple Doesn’t Love Micro-USB
“The micro USB pins are very small, and the power-carrying connectors, pins 1 and 5, are rated to carry 1.8 amps at 5 volts DC. That means that the maximum charging power that can safely flow across the connector is 9 watts. But the iPad wants 10 watts to charge. It will charge on as little as 5 watts, the output of most USB 3 ports and the specially modified USB 2 ports on newer Apple products, but needs 10 watts for fastest charging,” according to industry observer Steve Wildman.
With this approach, Apple still remains in compliance with its agreement in the EU. But given the net positive waste this solution will create and the recent hijinks Apple performed with the EPEAT compliance list for its MacBook products, Apple’s commitment to environmental issues appears to be getting weaker with each new product release.
View full post on ReadWriteWeb
Why You Should Be Terrified Of A Free Trade Agreement You’ve Never Heard Of [Infographic]
Aug 30th
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is the most influential piece of recent legal work you’ve probably never heard of. Can a Free Trade Agreement really threaten Internet freedom, redefine copyright and alter the course of global healthcare? You bet.
What The TPP Is
According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) and other participating or negotiating members, the TPP is just another Free Trade Agreement (FTA). Like most FTAs, the TPP regulates tariffs and duties and sets standards for trade among member countries. Unlike most FTAs, though, the TPP imposes additional standards on Intellectual Property (IP) law, including some that are more extensive and severe than any currently on its member countries’ books.
In its TPP FAQ, the feds justify the deviations from FTA norm by claiming the modern world has changed the game:
The Administration recognizes that the concerns that workers, businesses, farmers, and ranchers have today are different than those they had a generation ago. We intend to negotiate a high standard, regional agreement that addresses new and emerging issues, incorporates new elements reflecting our values and priorities, and responds to the 21st century challenges our citizens face.
What Might Work
If successful, the TPP could help the United States and its neighbors compete more effectively in ever-important Asian markets. In addition to securing a stronghold against economic bullying from China, the U.S. could use the TPP to gain access to lucrative agriculture markets in Japan and New Zealand, and reduce or eliminate oppressive import duties that have depressed exports. Other participants have similar goals. New Zealand, for example, is eyeing U.S. dairy markets.
Why The TPP Is So Scary
So what’s the problem? For starters, the whole negotiating process looks a little shady. In May, more than 30 legal scholars wrote a letter of protest to Trade Ambassador Ron Kirk over a lack of transparency. His response, essentially, was that it could be a lot worse. A few days later he asserted that the USTR had carried out “the most engaged and transparent process we possibly could,” though stories of discrimination against public criticism (like this bungle in Hollywood) didn’t help his case.
The bulk of the criticism centers around TPP’s Intellectual Property protections. On one hand, these protections impose copyright standards on member countries that are more extensive and punitive than current standards in any of the member states At the same time, it pressures Internet Service Providers in participating countries to filter their own Internet traffic for infringing material and enforce violations by blocking access to offending websites. In theory, a video mashup, a song cover or even some Harry Potter fan fiction could shut down an entire site. Taken to the extreme, it’s SOPA on a global scale, without a vote, minus the public scrutiny.
Concerns about excessive Intellectual Property protections extend beyond the digital world. Kensaku Fukui, a professor at Nihon University in Japan, is concerned that the TPP would give copyright holders complete and arbitrary control over “parallel goods” – licensed merchandise from multiple sources – which could disrupt established import/export markets. Want that rare import album? You might be out of luck.
Other impacts could be life-threatening. Twelve members of congress sent a letter to the USTR expressing concern that “long-term goals of public health and other programs in TPP countries would be challenged” due to increased costs for medications caused by an increased monopoly period in developing countries.
For more TPP criticisms, check out the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s topic page, or just check out the infographic:
Lead photo by Gobierno de Chile.
Container ship image courtesy of Shutterstock.
View full post on ReadWriteWeb
Why Every Company Should Adopt Twitter’s Internet Patent Agreement
Apr 17th
Twitter has raised the bar for recruiting the best and brightest developers, and without any real costs. Instead, the company’s Innovator’s Patent Agreement (IPA) appeals to a cause near and dear to many of today’s best developers: Refusing to weaponize software patents.
Sponsor
The IPA published today by Twitter (on GitHub, no less) should ensure that Twitter can amass a defensive collection of software patents without giving its developers cause for alarm.
If you’re wondering how developers feel about software patents, Andy Baio’s take is instructive. Baio, a former Yahoo, helped Yahoo file several patents and has lived to regret it. “Yahoo’s lawsuit against Facebook is an insult to the talented engineers who filed patents with the understanding they wouldn’t be used for evil. Betraying that trust won’t be forgotten, but I doubt it matters anymore. Nobody I know wants to work for a company like that.”
Pragmatism Meets Idealism
As much as many developers would like to see software patents abolished altogether, it’s unlikely that’s going to happen. It’s certainly not likely enough that a company like Twitter can ignore the possibility that it will be a target for software patent suits.
Twitter can’t simply sit out the patent arms race, as much as it might like to. But what it can do is strike a policy that both protects the company and assures developers their inventions and cooperation won’t be used against them. Thus, the IPA.
A defensive patent portfolio, that developers can be assured will be used only to defend against software patent assaults or with their permission, strikes the perfect balance. The company doesn’t have to antagonize its employees, and it doesn’t have to be left totally vulnerable to lawsuits.
As Yahoo has shown, an assurance that patents will be used defensively has to be put down in writing. Management changes, sometimes very rapidly. A company’s position on software patents can flip overnight – so developers can’t rely on verbal assurances that software patents won’t be used offensively.
Why Every Company Should Adopt the IPA
The agreement put forth by Twitter, or something very much like it, should become industry standard for a number of reasons:
1. Companies that adopt the IPA are going to have a competitive edge over companies that do not. If a developer has the option to work on two interesting projects, with similar pay and perks, the knowledge that their work won’t be used against them in the future is likely to be a persuasive tie-breaker.
2. Companies that adopt the IPA are less likely to need incentive plans to convince developers to file for patents. As Baio wrote, Yahoo helped amass its arsenal with a “patent incentive program” that awarded “sizable bonuses to everyone who took the time to apply.” With an IPA in place, employers can make a much stronger case to employees that they should help with patent applications.
3. It could ultimately reduce the number of pure-play patent trolls that buy up software patents from failing and desperate companies. What’s the only thing worse than a competitor with a patent portfolio? A litigation company with no products but patent suits and every incentive to file nuisance actions, with little downside for failure.
4. The IPA can act as a poison pill for the patent portfolios of companies that don’t succeed. They can still sell off patents for companies that wish to have a defensive portfolio – but the patents couldn’t be used offensively without the inventor’s permission.
The Next Step
Twitter’s IPA is a good step, but the company should go one step further. Not long ago, a group of companies that were involved in Linux development created the Open Invention Network (OIN). The idea is simple: Form a patent pool that lets any company attacked use the patents for defense, but the companies in the pool cannot sue another for patent infringement.
A larger patent pool is in order, and Twitter could get the ball rolling. Any company that offers the IPA to its employees for all current and future patents should be able to join the patent pool. Assuming Twitter gets some traction with the IPA, it could start a trend that helps curtail the systemic abuse of software patents.
Ultimately, that’s good for Twitter – and for any company that looks to make its money by innovation rather than litigation. And that’s good for the entire industry.
View full post on ReadWriteWeb
Twitter Announces Patent Agreement Where Employees Control IP
Apr 17th
Today Twitter announced its new Innovator’s Patent Agreement (IPA), which will give its engineers and designers control over the patents they create.
This is a dramatic break from the current approach in Silicon Valley, where companies take full control of patents and can then sell them or use them in lawsuits. “With the IPA, employees can be assured that their patents will be used only as a shield rather than as a weapon,” Twitter wrote in its announcement.
The IPA will apply retroactively to patents created in the past. Twitter says it will implement the agreement later this year.
Twitter has had its share of patent litigation. In October of last year, patent lawyer Dinesh Agarwal claimed Twitter infringed on his patent for a “method and system for creating an interactive virtual community of famous people.” A court rejected Twitter’s attempt to get the case dismissed, and it moved to trial. The judge pressured Twitter to settle with the patent holder but Twitter eventually won; a federal jury in Norfolk, Virginia, sided with the company.
Image via Shutterstock.
View full post on ReadWriteWeb
SEO Services Buyer’s Guide: Key Components of a Work Agreement
Mar 14th
A work agreement between your company and an outsourced SEO services provider helps to clarify the scope of the project, expectations, deliverables, payment terms and more. A written contract is a must before entering into a working relationship.
View full post on Search Engine Watch – Latest
SEO Services Buyer’s Guide: Key Components of a Work Agreement – Search Engine Watch
Mar 14th
|
SEO Services Buyer's Guide: Key Components of a Work Agreement
Search Engine Watch A written work agreement serves a number of purposes and no SEO project should start without one. In addition to offering protection, it clarifies expectations, eases communication throughout the project, and helps to keep the project on track. |
View full post on SEO – Google News
Microsoft: Windows Store Developer Agreement Subject to Change
Dec 7th
Since last September, Microsoft has promised that the legal-ese in its Windows Store terms would be straightforward. Thus far, the company has lived up to that promise with an App Developer Agreement (ADA) and a set of certification requirements for Windows apps (Metro-style), both published yesterday.
But some ambiguities and open questions do remain, and a Microsoft spokesperson tells ReadWriteWeb this afternoon that this may be on purpose. The licensing terms the company released yesterday only apply to beta apps and contest entries submitted between now and February 3. During that period as well as the subsequent beta period, according to the current ADA, apps must be released for free, as the earliest date in which commercial transactions will commence is the day the Windows 8 Release Candidate is made available – and that date remains a secret.
Sponsor
For an app to be visible and downloadable through Microsoft’s Windows Store for Windows 8, it must be certified by the company. This according to the App Developer Agreement released yesterday, and we can expect this rule not to change. The rule means a certified app is by definition a “Metro-style” app, using the new Windows Runtime (WinRT) library and APIs. The ADA gives prospective future publishers a generous taste of how it should expect to be treated once the store goes commercial.
But as a Microsoft spokesperson told RWW this afternoon, the terms being offered to developers today, especially for inclusion in the company’s First Apps Contest, are limited only to specific development periods. For now, we can assume the ADA cover the pre-beta period, which is based around the current Win8 Developer Preview and which ends in late February; and the Win8 beta period, which begins immediately thereafter. However, a built-in opportunity for Microsoft to make adjustments is at the start of the Win8 Release Candidate period, which is a milestone directly referenced in the current language of the App Developer Agreement.
“Since the current certification requirements are specifically designed for the beta period,” the spokesperson tells us, “it’s likely that when and if they change, they’ll essentially change to fit the next part of the product’s development cycle.” This was in response to our question about whether developers would be given notice of changes to terms, and whether they would be given a grace period to comply should those changes be extensive. The response indicates that changes to terms may be revealed when the milestone dates for future development cycles (such as Win8 RT) are announced.
A draft of the Standard Application License Terms for end users is attached to the end of the ADA. As these Terms currently read with respect to the end user’s installation and use rights for a published app, “The application may be removed from any devices onto which you have installed the Application, and any associated license rights will terminate upon such removal, no later than the next public release of Windows 8, which may be a Release Candidate release.” (Already there’s one change to make: Either capitalize the “A” in “Application” or don’t.)
Hidden details in the ADA and Cert Requirements
There’s no evidence that Microsoft is actively obfuscating terms in order to cover up advantages that it might later claim. This is important, especially for veteran iTunes publishers familiar with the famous “Section 3.3.1″ clause of the Developers’ Agreement (dropped in September 2010) which specified that any program sold through iTunes must be “originally written” in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript (for WebKit), and must compile against the iPhone OS APIs at that time.
Choice of tools and methods. Yet the fact that a Microsoft-certified “Windows app” is by definition a Metro-style app, according to the Certification Requirements, gives Windows Store one poignant similarity after all between iTunes circa 2009 and the Windows Store circa 2012: Metro apps that qualify for inclusion in Windows Store are bound to the new WinRT APIs – not to Flash and not to Silverlight.
By contrast, Microsoft is not claiming any authority over what tools developers must use to build their apps, which was the case with iTunes before Apple dropped Section 3.3.1. And in an important concession found in recently updated documentation, the DirectX graphics library may still be used by C++ developers to write Metro-style apps that generate content that graphics cards geared for DirectX may accelerate. Although C# and Visual Basic developers are encouraged to instead use the new XAML libraries for defining on-screen resources, Microsoft simply saying DirectX is permissible in certified Metro-style apps opens up a rich world of possibilities for games developers on the WinRT platform.
Users must be able to install five copies. The current draft of the Application License Terms grants users the right to install up to five copies of the app on “Windows 8 enabled devices that are affiliated with the Windows Live ID associated with your Windows Store account.” This gives a user plenty of opportunity to purchase an app once, and install it to her work PC, her home office PC, her media center PC, a laptop, and a tablet.
What’s also important here is the authentication mechanism: If you want to be a Windows 8 apps user, you need a Windows Live ID. This speaks to Microsoft’s intention to be the central identity provider for Windows users, giving others like Facebook and OpenID equal access but making sure Live ID gets the front door.
No Windows Store exclusivity. Microsoft, as should be expected, retains the right to revoke a developer’s Store account. But the reasons for doing so are limited to failing “to keep your account in good standing,” and thus far those reasons do not appear to include discovering that an app is available elsewhere (including on some other platform), and for some other price.
This was, and to some extent continues to be, a stickler for iOS app developers. Apple has since relaxed several of its exclusivity requirements, including that an app must originally be written for iPhone, and can only appear in the iTunes App Store. However, Apple has not relaxed its terms with respect to developers’ rights to publish elsewhere. Once an app appears there, from Apple’s point of view, “You agree not to distribute Your Application to third parties via other distribution methods or enable or permit others to do so.”
By stark contrast, Microsoft’s terms state that developers grant Microsoft the right to host, install, use, etc. the developers’ software in connection with the Store, but nowhere in that paragraph does the word “exclusive” appear. For now, Microsoft’s ADA also does not restrict a developer’s right to sell his app somewhere else (say, Amazon) for less than the sale price for the app on the Windows Store.
Next: A rejection letter comes with advice…
VIDEO: Maui Signs Sister City Agreement with South Korea’s Seo-gu – Maui Now
Nov 15th
 Maui Now |
VIDEO: Maui Signs Sister City Agreement with South Korea's Seo-gu
Maui Now Maui Mayor Alan Arakawa and Seo-gu Mayor Hwan Yong Park exchanged gifts and letters of intent during a morning ceremony at the Kalana O Maui building. “As the United States and Korea come closer in finalizing the free-trade agreement, it will improve … |
View full post on SEO – Google News
