IBM slaps Apple with a lawsuit for recruiting top chip designer -- like they were going to use him anyways

In broad, soap operatic strokes of the finest sort, IBM and Apple are at each other's throats over Apple's latest recruit: IBM's vice president of microprocessor technology development. Improbably named Mark Papermaster, the man in question is responsible for IBM's blade server division, and IBM is pretty sure there's a non-compete in there somewhere, especially with Apple's recent acquisition of PA Semi, a chip developer with PowerPC technology similar to IBM's -- IBM has filed lawsuits both against Apple in California (a state traditionally indifferent to non-competes) and against Papermaster in New York. We're not going to get into all the sordid details, but just because IBM and Apple are very, very angry at each other right now doesn't mean they're mad at you. Probably.

[Kiwi616 @ Oct 31st 2008 10:50AM]

Love non-competition agreements....and the litigious society we live in.

[bondsbw @ Oct 31st 2008 11:34AM]

Agreed.

Engadget, get your facts straight... IBM is suing Mark Papermaster, not Apple.

[asdffdsa @ Oct 31st 2008 11:50AM]

do these hold water?

I have a friend that is a lawyer - I keep meaning to ask but I never remember when we're hanging out.

[LondonConsultant @ Oct 31st 2008 1:04PM]

America. The land of the free - yet its people don't even have the freedom to work...

[Industryplayer @ Nov 11th 2008 6:35PM]

This is emblematic of IBM's marginal/medeocre performance in the chip business, resulting desperation, and general disregard for IBM's employees. It's not the employee's fault that they are seeking jobs elsewhere in significant numbers.

IBM: If you don't take care of your employees other companies seeking excellence will!

[ben @ Oct 31st 2008 10:53AM]

Let go, IBM, Apple doesn't want you anymore. Maybe you can still be friends.

[Eric @ Oct 31st 2008 1:37PM]

This is very similar to my girlfriend's ex-boyfriend... He thought that yelling at her would make her come back to him.

[iEye @ Oct 31st 2008 11:02AM]

"an attempt to expand Apple's presence in the markets for servers and chips for handheld devices."

sweet, I guess the only reason to hire competent people is to put out constant FAIL products...

[quandmeme @ Oct 31st 2008 11:22AM]

California Supreme court made it clear this summer that non competes are illegal. Assuming IBM's lawyers are several orders of magnitude more aware of the implications of this than I, I wonder if this relates no to any non-compete but to contracts they still have left over from the PowerPC alliance.

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147190.PDF

[RijilV @ Oct 31st 2008 11:26AM]

I imagine IBM's lawyers don't really care about the CA court's decision:

"IBM's complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York "

... from the articile ...

[Mikey @ Oct 31st 2008 11:31AM]

Shoot... I meant for my comment below to be here:

"IBM's non-compete was probably under the laws of NY (where much of IBM's operations are located) or Deleware (where I'm guessing IBM is incorporated), so Cali law probably doesn't apply. I don't really know New York's or Deleware's law non-competes, but generally they are allowed if they are reasonable in scope (I'm very surprised that California outlawed them completely... that seemed like a good way of ensuring that companies will flee from the state)."

@ RijilV: The SDNY court would care (and would have to follow) about the California court's decision if IBM's non-compete fell under California law. But, as I said above, it probably doesn't

[bioadam @ Oct 31st 2008 12:18PM]

Non-competes are difficult to enforce in California, and yet California is still the tech capital of the world. Maybe the other 49 of the United States will catch on.

[Pt_Frost @ Oct 31st 2008 11:25AM]

As far as I know, in Canada, (despite a lot of companies putting non-competition clauses in emlopyee contracts), these clauses are not enforcable and you can't be held to it. I wonder if it is the same in the US. (which would mean this lawsuit will fall through)

[mrgrim @ Oct 31st 2008 11:28AM]

Happy HaLlOwEeN... You digital sickos

[Testies, Testies, 1, 2... 3? @ Oct 31st 2008 2:37PM]

Shut the hell up...

[Dee @ Oct 31st 2008 11:29AM]

I don't think Apple is going to make new Mac's that are PPC, allot of developers are making Intel only apps not universal ones.

They just trying to make ARM type chips for iPhones.

[Mikey @ Oct 31st 2008 11:29AM]

IBM's non-compete was probably under the laws of NY (where much of IBM's operations are located) or Deleware (where I'm guessing IBM is incorporated), so Cali law probably doesn't apply. I don't really know New York's or Deleware's law non-competes, but generally they are allowed if they are reasonable in scope (I'm very surprised that California outlawed them completely... that seemed like a good way of ensuring that companies will flee from the state).

[Tom @ Oct 31st 2008 11:38AM]

Nice touch on the story's image. Subtle, yet refined.

[Canoo @ Oct 31st 2008 11:59AM]

+1

i loled too :)

[Groan @ Oct 31st 2008 11:41AM]

Has a non-compete ever been enforced in a court of law? I thought it was a pretty flimsy legal issue?

[BlurMagic @ Oct 31st 2008 11:56AM]

Is it just me, or does it seem like Apple is going to court daily? Psystar, IBM, That little Korean company that was making knock-off shuffles...

[Rob @ Oct 31st 2008 12:04PM]

With the cash reserves that Apple has it is a huge target for both frivolous and real lawsuits. It is guaranteed to have a very busy legal department

[Ed T @ Oct 31st 2008 12:03PM]

Apple was probably warned several times by IBM about poaching their people, and this Papermaster guy was just the last straw. I guess we'll get to see who's legal department swings the big dick...

[onyx @ Oct 31st 2008 12:42PM]

how about that. IBM is nothing more than a bank. They hardly make anything. They dropped the ball on the G5 and now they whine about Apple picking up the slack. Buzz off International Bum Machine .

[Kax02 @ Oct 31st 2008 1:18PM]

omg I know right? what have they done lately except install themselves in a financial goldmine being the primary development house between consoles this generation (PPC on Wii, 360, Cell on PS3) work on 22nm SRAM development making die shrinks and advances in technology even faster, push through with a multi-threaded chip that has worked for ages (or were you one of the mind that the 30+ stage Pentium 4 was a good copy of it) and more.

Yeah they totally dropped the hammer.... oh wait... they didn't.

Helps when your view isn't limited to "lol wut bout da Gee Fyve"

[Chris @ Oct 31st 2008 11:55PM]

Actually IBM's technical leadership is in chip and systems manufacturing (the Power6 and future Power7 systems are as slick as it gets). Speaking from experience, if they didn't have this deep technical know-how, they wouldn't be a technology company at all. They would just be a over-glorified services whore.

It's sad really. One of the greatest technology companies of all time has been reduced to suing individuals because they no longer want to work there. Suck it up Palmisano...you wanted outsourcing in a big way, now you're getting it.

[Joseph @ Oct 31st 2008 12:50PM]

I for one welcome our new 604e overlords.

[Brian @ Oct 31st 2008 2:17PM]

It's "anyway", not "anywayS"

[Timbo @ Oct 31st 2008 8:00PM]

California is a bad place to pick this particular fight - trust me, I'm a lawyer

[Mikey @ Nov 3rd 2008 12:34PM]

That is only if the court would have to apply California law... but we don't know what state law the employee contract falls under (although its probably not California, New York or Delaware is much more likely).

If you are lawyer and expect people to "trust" you, you might want to be a little more careful.

[Chris @ Oct 31st 2008 11:45PM]

If IBM didn't treat its people like shit they wouldn't want to leave. Get over it IBM...go find someone in India or China.

[GrangerFX @ Nov 2nd 2008 4:39PM]

Good luck enforcing whatever the New York court decides in California. There are laws that say that you cannot own a person even if you are IBM. Here in California we may be bankrupt, but at least we are free.

[Mikey @ Nov 3rd 2008 12:35PM]

If IBM gets a judgment in NY federal court, it will have no trouble enforcing it. It's called the Full Faith and Credit Clause. Your rant about "freedom" is ridiculous.

[MM @ Nov 4th 2008 3:11AM]

Why can't IBM just assassinate him like the Russians do?

[George @ Nov 5th 2008 2:40PM]

IBM has a bad habit of tempering with former employees further employment. This has got to be in part sour grapes on IBM's part for the loss of the sales of PPC chips when APPLE switched to INTEL. How does Mr. Papermaster heading up the iPOD group interfere with IBM's business, it doesn't. IBM doesn't compete in this realm and neither does APPLE compete with IBM in any way. Services - no. PC's and MACs - no, Servers - no, Software - no. IBM likes to flatter itself far too much in the industry, and its paranoia has raised its ugly head in many other former IBMer cases. I suspect that Mr. Papermaster finally got tired of the new IBM philosophy, "Every moment here must be unpleasant." as opposed to the old attitude, "Respect for the individual." IBM's suit is specious, abusive and utter garbage. It should be dismissed.