Here is a summary of the key points from the Hacker News comments, organized as a bulleted list using Markdown:
FTC's Definition of Non-Compete Clause: The FTC clarifies that "garden leave" agreements where the worker is still employed and receiving the same total annual compensation and benefits would not be considered a non-compete clause under the new rule. However, the FTC declines to provide opinions on how the definition would apply in every potential scenario.
Measuring Innovation by Patents: The FTC's ruling mentions that banning non-competes is expected to drive innovation, estimating an average increase of 17,000 to 29,000 more patents each year for the next 10 years. Some commenters find it surprising and questionable to measure innovation by the number of patents issued.
Concerns about Implementation: While many are in favor of banning non-compete agreements, there are concerns that parties benefiting from these agreements will fight against the ruling. Some question whether the FTC has the authority to make this change, as contract law is typically part of state law.
Effective Date and Exceptions: The rule will go into effect 120 days after publication in the federal register, making all previous non-competes unenforceable, except for those involving senior executives. However, senior executives cannot enter into new non-competes.
Potential Legal Challenges: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is likely to file a lawsuit challenging the FTC's authority to ban non-competes. There are also concerns about the ambiguity of "unfair" business practices and whether the FTC's actions might be seen as usurping Congress's power, especially if the Chevron doctrine falls.
Political Support: Some commenters expect politicians who champion the "right to work" to support banning legal contracts that restrict an individual's right to work.
In summary, while many view the FTC's ruling as a positive step towards protecting workers' rights and promoting innovation, there are concerns about the implementation, legal challenges, and the FTC's authority to make such changes. The effectiveness of the ruling will likely depend on how these issues are resolved in the coming months.
Hacker News 의견
Here is a summary of the key points from the Hacker News comments, organized as a bulleted list using Markdown:
FTC's Definition of Non-Compete Clause: The FTC clarifies that "garden leave" agreements where the worker is still employed and receiving the same total annual compensation and benefits would not be considered a non-compete clause under the new rule. However, the FTC declines to provide opinions on how the definition would apply in every potential scenario.
Measuring Innovation by Patents: The FTC's ruling mentions that banning non-competes is expected to drive innovation, estimating an average increase of 17,000 to 29,000 more patents each year for the next 10 years. Some commenters find it surprising and questionable to measure innovation by the number of patents issued.
Concerns about Implementation: While many are in favor of banning non-compete agreements, there are concerns that parties benefiting from these agreements will fight against the ruling. Some question whether the FTC has the authority to make this change, as contract law is typically part of state law.
Effective Date and Exceptions: The rule will go into effect 120 days after publication in the federal register, making all previous non-competes unenforceable, except for those involving senior executives. However, senior executives cannot enter into new non-competes.
Potential Legal Challenges: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is likely to file a lawsuit challenging the FTC's authority to ban non-competes. There are also concerns about the ambiguity of "unfair" business practices and whether the FTC's actions might be seen as usurping Congress's power, especially if the Chevron doctrine falls.
Political Support: Some commenters expect politicians who champion the "right to work" to support banning legal contracts that restrict an individual's right to work.
In summary, while many view the FTC's ruling as a positive step towards protecting workers' rights and promoting innovation, there are concerns about the implementation, legal challenges, and the FTC's authority to make such changes. The effectiveness of the ruling will likely depend on how these issues are resolved in the coming months.