←back to thread

Tell HN: Beware confidentiality agreements that act as lifetime non competes

416 points throwarayes | 1 comments | 21 Jun 25 16:02 UTC | HN request time: 0.203s | source

Just a note of warning from personal experience.

Companies don’t really need non-competes anymore. Some companies take an extremely broad interpretation of IP confidentiality, where they consider doing any work in the industry during your lifetime an inevitable confidentiality violation. They argue it would be impossible for you to work elsewhere in this industry during your entire career without violating confidentiality with the technical and business instincts you bring to that domain. It doesn’t require conscious violation on your part (they argue).

So beware and read your employment agreement carefully.

More here https://www.promarket.org/2024/02/08/confidentiality-agreeme...

And this is the insane legal doctrine behind this

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inevitable_disclosure

Show context
tianqi ◴[21 Jun 25 19:56 UTC] No.44340313[source]▶
I think the Chinese law is effective in this regard: in order to maintain any non-competition agreement, the company must continue to pay you a monthly compensation amount equal to 30% of your total monthly income when you were at the company. Whenever the payment stops, the non-competition agreement is automatically void.
replies(11): >>44340472 #>>44340562 #>>44340579 #>>44340850 #>>44341170 #>>44341188 #>>44341352 #>>44341558 #>>44343224 #>>44346921 #>>44349939 #
marcosdumay ◴[21 Jun 25 20:39 UTC] No.44340579[source]▶
Or the Brazilian law, that requires 100% compensation, and puts the onus on the company to prove that the non-compete is necessary before it can be enforced.

If you ever see one of those contracts here, it's usually usually for a very reasonable situation and a well paid position.

replies(1): >>44341528 #
benjamincburns ◴[21 Jun 25 23:36 UTC] No.44341528[source]▶
I generally ask for 150% - usually on the expectation that it’ll make the non-compete go away.

It’s not at all a ridiculous ask, either. I’ve made a career out of going after high-impact roles in whatever is the fastest growing area of technology at the time. The non-compete isn’t just asking me to sacrifice the income from my next role, it’s asking me to sacrifice the experience as well. It also limits my ability to renegotiate comp while on the job, because they know your BATNA isn’t to just go get a better offer from a competitor.

If a company wants me to give all of that up, I’m sure as shit not doing it just for the privilege of working for them.

replies(1): >>44348351 #
margalabargala ◴[22 Jun 25 16:53 UTC] No.44348351[source]▶
If it's 100%, I'd rather the noncompete not go away. If I am able to live off the salary, why not take the free paid vacation if it's offered? I can spend the time doing and learning things for myself, rather than the company.
replies(1): >>44352129 #
1. marcosdumay ◴[23 Jun 25 03:03 UTC] No.44352129[source]▶
In principle, if you are changing jobs, it's because you found one with something like a raise or better working conditions. Being unable to look for those has a cost.