techThoughts ::
Thoughts, ideas, code, speculation and news
about all things technology.
Full feed
Full feed Partial feed
December 06, 2005
  • Once again Bruce Schneier uncovers something I find quite disturbing. This reminds me of reading over non-disclosure, non-compete and or employment agreements. Why? Because when doing so, it seems more times than not (especially lately), there are items written in that are completely unbelievable and sometimes unenforceable. For example, one company actually had it written that no employee was allowed to purchase/ own stock in a competing company... Since the aforementioned company is in the software sector, as they defined it, no employee was allowed to own stock in Microsoft, Oracle or any other firm. Moreover, it was all at their discretion; they actually expected employees to ask for permission before making investments in companies, public or not, and could approve or decline at their discretion. Absurd? Yes.

    When asked about this clause, their answer was "Well, we do not enforce it or anything." Then why is it in the agreement? If you have no plans to enforce said item, then take it out. Long story longer, while it seems unlikely the FCC will be able to enforce the clauses outlined below, the trend towards inserting these items is disturbing because if there is an attempt to enforce them, their validity will need to be litigated. Litigation takes time, and if you get enough of these items stacked up, then that is more time and more money. This is not just governmental, it is also in the private sector.. Bottom line, pay attention and be careful to what you sign, but I digress.

    FBI to Approve All Software?

    Sounds implausible, I know. But how else do you explain this FCC ruling (from September -- I missed it until now):

    Dec 6, 2005 at 01:27 PM in Current Affairs, Legal, News, Take Notice