Showing posts with label Business. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Business. Show all posts
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Saturday, August 9, 2008
CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS STATE'S STRICT BAN ON NON-COMPETITION AGREEMENTS FOR EXITING EMPLOYEES
On August 7, 2008, the California Supreme Court struck-down previous appellate court rulings that would allow employers to require departing employees to sign non-competition agreements as long as the non-competition agreements were narrowly-tailored.
On balance, the California Supreme Court focused on the harshness of non-competition agreements and the competing interest of company trade secrets. The case is Edwards vs. Arthur Andersen.
Edwards, as plaintiff, argued that he was illegally prevented from pursuing his profession as an accountant and tax manager, via a non-competition agreement with Arthur Andersen, after the 2002 Enron/Arthur Andersen collapse.
The California Supreme Court agreed with Edwards. The non-competition agreement was an illegal restriction on Edward's right to work. In short, the non-competition agreement was illegal under a long-line of California employment law history.
As CNET reports, the decision follows precedent, for the most part. "The California law has been in existence since 1872, forbidding "non-compete clauses" that restrict management employees' options in their next job or business."
"But the law has been interpreted differently throughout the state, and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has ruled in favor of allowing a company to limit their employees' future job choices, as long as it doesn't prevent them from working in the same field."
Now the California Supreme Court has weighed-in. The Court's ruling demonstrates California's overall adversity to non-competition agreements.
The ruling is particularly good news for those in the computer, internet, and digital-media industries, as these sectors of California business have high-mobility and a fueled employee interest in moving to the next opportunity or idea.
As reported, these sectors of the industry have watched the Edwards case closely.
On balance, the California Supreme Court focused on the harshness of non-competition agreements and the competing interest of company trade secrets. The case is Edwards vs. Arthur Andersen.
Edwards, as plaintiff, argued that he was illegally prevented from pursuing his profession as an accountant and tax manager, via a non-competition agreement with Arthur Andersen, after the 2002 Enron/Arthur Andersen collapse.
The California Supreme Court agreed with Edwards. The non-competition agreement was an illegal restriction on Edward's right to work. In short, the non-competition agreement was illegal under a long-line of California employment law history.
As CNET reports, the decision follows precedent, for the most part. "The California law has been in existence since 1872, forbidding "non-compete clauses" that restrict management employees' options in their next job or business."
"But the law has been interpreted differently throughout the state, and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has ruled in favor of allowing a company to limit their employees' future job choices, as long as it doesn't prevent them from working in the same field."
Now the California Supreme Court has weighed-in. The Court's ruling demonstrates California's overall adversity to non-competition agreements.
The ruling is particularly good news for those in the computer, internet, and digital-media industries, as these sectors of California business have high-mobility and a fueled employee interest in moving to the next opportunity or idea.
As reported, these sectors of the industry have watched the Edwards case closely.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
NEW YORK SUPREME COURT RULES DELL ELECTRONICS ENGAGED IN FRAUDULENT AND DECEPTIVE PRACTICES REGARDING CONSUMERS - MAY 2008
On May 27, 2008, New York State Supreme Court Justice Joseph C. Teresi ruled that Dell Electronics engaged in fraud, false advertising, and deceptive business practices pertaining to customer guarantees.
The decision is a victory for New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who brought the case against Dell in 2007, charging that the company failed to live up to its responsibilities to its customers.
Dell has said the company disagrees with the ruling and feels that it was based on the complaints of only a small number of customers, and is not indicative of its over-all practices. Dell will, likely, appeal the ruling.
The court's 26-page opinion specifically addresses Dell's promise of interest-free and no-payment purchase agreements, its rebate payment practices, and its on-site tech service, which Dell apparently failed to adequately provide.
New York District Attorney Cuomo stated, “We have won an important victory that will force Dell to live up to its responsibilities," continuing that, “For too long at Dell the promise of customer service was a bait and switch that left thousands of people paying for essentially no service at all."
Apparently, Dell's failure to meet its promises to customers was wide-spread, not unique.
Further proceedings pend as to penalties for Dell's deceptive practices, and various other aspects of the ruling are yet to be settled [more soon].
The decision is a victory for New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who brought the case against Dell in 2007, charging that the company failed to live up to its responsibilities to its customers.
Dell has said the company disagrees with the ruling and feels that it was based on the complaints of only a small number of customers, and is not indicative of its over-all practices. Dell will, likely, appeal the ruling.
The court's 26-page opinion specifically addresses Dell's promise of interest-free and no-payment purchase agreements, its rebate payment practices, and its on-site tech service, which Dell apparently failed to adequately provide.
New York District Attorney Cuomo stated, “We have won an important victory that will force Dell to live up to its responsibilities," continuing that, “For too long at Dell the promise of customer service was a bait and switch that left thousands of people paying for essentially no service at all."
Apparently, Dell's failure to meet its promises to customers was wide-spread, not unique.
Further proceedings pend as to penalties for Dell's deceptive practices, and various other aspects of the ruling are yet to be settled [more soon].
Sunday, July 13, 2008
ANHEUSER-BUSCH AGREES TO $50 BILLION TAKEOVER BID BY BELGIAN BREWING GIANT INBEV; THE DEAL IS REPORTEDLY $70 PER SHARE
On July 13, 2008, the Wall Street Journal reported that Anheuser-Busch has agreed to to be acquired by Belgian Brewing Giant, InBev, for a sweetened offer of $49.91 billion.
The InBev offer is reportedly $70 per share, somewhat higher than its previous offer of $65 per share that was quickly rejected by Anheuser-Busch in June. At the time, InBev threatened suit.
Anheuser -Busch is the number one brewer in America, controlling 50% of the US market alone, and InBev's purchase of Anheuser-Busch will create, by far, the largest brewery conglomerate in the world.
This is big news in St. Louis, Missouri, the home of Anheuser-Busch. It is equally big news in the international beverage industry. Of course, neither company is exclusively a brewer.
Here is the Reuters' release (Business Feed Article | Business ).
The InBev offer is reportedly $70 per share, somewhat higher than its previous offer of $65 per share that was quickly rejected by Anheuser-Busch in June. At the time, InBev threatened suit.
Anheuser -Busch is the number one brewer in America, controlling 50% of the US market alone, and InBev's purchase of Anheuser-Busch will create, by far, the largest brewery conglomerate in the world.
This is big news in St. Louis, Missouri, the home of Anheuser-Busch. It is equally big news in the international beverage industry. Of course, neither company is exclusively a brewer.
Here is the Reuters' release (Business Feed Article | Business ).
Saturday, July 12, 2008
MICROSOFT'S TAKEOVER BID FOR YAHOO FAILS, AND YAHOO'S PARTNERSHIP WITH GOOGLE IS SUSPENDED FOR 3.5 MONTHS; WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE INTERNET GIANTS?
As the Washington Post first reported July 2, 2008, (reported) the Justice Department's antitrust division is investigating the proposed advertising partnership between Yahoo and Google.
In May, at the request of the Justice Department, the two companies suspended the agreed-upon partnership for three and a half months, while the Department investigates antitrust issues related to the deal.
Yahoo contends that the investigation is not unusual, washingtonpost.com reports. However, attorneys familiar with similar Department of Justice antitrust investigations say that the type of requests now being made by the Department are not routine.
"They don't do it without having identified significant issues," said M.J. Moltenbrey, a Freshfields, Bruckhaus, & Deringer lawyer, who was director of civil non-merger enforcement in the Justice Department's antitrust division in the 1990s. "It involves approval at higher levels within the antitrust division." washingtonpost.com reports.
The Justice Department, and Google, have not commented on the investigation. However, Google competitors and critics complain, Google will gain a monopoly on internet advertising, if the Yahoo deal is approved.
Only weeks prior, Yahoo rejected Microsoft's "unsolicited" $44.6 billion takeover bid, which was a $31 per share offer. Yahoo's stock price has been on a wild ride since the announcement of potential developments, earlier this year.
Yahoo's stock has traded as high as $40 per share when the Microsoft deal was announced in February, but, in recent weeks, it has remained under the $31 per share price offered by Microsoft. In fact, Yahoo's stock has traded as low as $24 per share since the Microsoft offer was rejected.
Before formally rejecting the Microsoft offer, Yahoo stated it would accept a $41 per share offer from Microsoft. Microsoft, however, did not counter. In response, Yahoo proceeded to close the advertising deal with Google, which is now under DOJ scrutiny.
Regardless, Microsoft is preparing a new offer for Yahoo, and it has approached other media companies about joining in the deal, the Wall Street Journal reports (Microsoft Seeks Partners for New Yahoo Run). Microsoft has held discussions with Time-Warner and NewsCorp, among others, the Journal reports.
[More on both the Yahoo/Google antitrust investigation, and Microsoft's renewed takeover bid, shortly].
In May, at the request of the Justice Department, the two companies suspended the agreed-upon partnership for three and a half months, while the Department investigates antitrust issues related to the deal.
Yahoo contends that the investigation is not unusual, washingtonpost.com reports. However, attorneys familiar with similar Department of Justice antitrust investigations say that the type of requests now being made by the Department are not routine.
"They don't do it without having identified significant issues," said M.J. Moltenbrey, a Freshfields, Bruckhaus, & Deringer lawyer, who was director of civil non-merger enforcement in the Justice Department's antitrust division in the 1990s. "It involves approval at higher levels within the antitrust division." washingtonpost.com reports.
The Justice Department, and Google, have not commented on the investigation. However, Google competitors and critics complain, Google will gain a monopoly on internet advertising, if the Yahoo deal is approved.
Only weeks prior, Yahoo rejected Microsoft's "unsolicited" $44.6 billion takeover bid, which was a $31 per share offer. Yahoo's stock price has been on a wild ride since the announcement of potential developments, earlier this year.
Yahoo's stock has traded as high as $40 per share when the Microsoft deal was announced in February, but, in recent weeks, it has remained under the $31 per share price offered by Microsoft. In fact, Yahoo's stock has traded as low as $24 per share since the Microsoft offer was rejected.
Before formally rejecting the Microsoft offer, Yahoo stated it would accept a $41 per share offer from Microsoft. Microsoft, however, did not counter. In response, Yahoo proceeded to close the advertising deal with Google, which is now under DOJ scrutiny.
Regardless, Microsoft is preparing a new offer for Yahoo, and it has approached other media companies about joining in the deal, the Wall Street Journal reports (Microsoft Seeks Partners for New Yahoo Run). Microsoft has held discussions with Time-Warner and NewsCorp, among others, the Journal reports.
[More on both the Yahoo/Google antitrust investigation, and Microsoft's renewed takeover bid, shortly].
Saturday, July 5, 2008
ANHEUSER-BUSCH, THE PRIDE AND PILLAR OF ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, CONTINUES TO FIGHT $46.3 BILLION TAKEOVER BY BELGIAN BREWER INBEV
Anheuser-Busch, the pride of St. Louis, Missouri, and a 50% holder of the domestic beer market, with an equally impressive share of international beer sales, is fighting to maintain control of the century-old, family-legacy business. However, as a public company, and as news insiders have suggested, even Anheuser-Busch is vulnerable to a takeover. [See ipeb Sunday July 13 article for new details]
On June 11, Belgian Brewer InBev, a huge international beverage-provider in its own right, made an unsolicited $65 per share offer for Anheuser-Busch, which the Anheuser-Busch board of directors are prepared to reject, cnnmoney.com reports.
In response, on June 26, InBev announced that it had filed a lawsuit in Delaware Chancery Court, where Anheuser-Busch is incorporated, to have Anheuser-Busch shareholders remove board of director members who oppose the sale.
It goes without saying, that the tight-knit, St. Louis community is vehemently opposed to the takeover. Not only does Anheuser-Busch employ 6,000 workers in the St. Louis area, but it is instrumental in philanthropy, education, cultural development, and community out-reach in St. Louis.
For a look at Anheuser-Busch go to (Anheuser-Busch Companies).
Here is the cnnmoney.com article referenced above (InBev makes hostile move in Anheuser-Busch takeover) and another article from NPR (Anheuser-Busch Takeover Talk Shakes St. Louis).
On June 11, Belgian Brewer InBev, a huge international beverage-provider in its own right, made an unsolicited $65 per share offer for Anheuser-Busch, which the Anheuser-Busch board of directors are prepared to reject, cnnmoney.com reports.
In response, on June 26, InBev announced that it had filed a lawsuit in Delaware Chancery Court, where Anheuser-Busch is incorporated, to have Anheuser-Busch shareholders remove board of director members who oppose the sale.
It goes without saying, that the tight-knit, St. Louis community is vehemently opposed to the takeover. Not only does Anheuser-Busch employ 6,000 workers in the St. Louis area, but it is instrumental in philanthropy, education, cultural development, and community out-reach in St. Louis.
For a look at Anheuser-Busch go to (Anheuser-Busch Companies).
Here is the cnnmoney.com article referenced above (InBev makes hostile move in Anheuser-Busch takeover) and another article from NPR (Anheuser-Busch Takeover Talk Shakes St. Louis).
Friday, July 4, 2008
41 YEAR-OLD SWIMMER DARA TORRES HEADS TO BEIJING OLYMPICS IN MULTIPLE EVENTS; WHEN SHE COMES HOME, MANY BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES SHOULD AWAIT
41 year-old Dara Torres won the first of her nine Olympic swimming medals in 1984 in Los Angeles. She is now heading back to the Olympics representing the United States in Beijing, China in multiple events. The business opportunities that await her after Beijing are enormous.
Not only are her accomplishments important Olympic accomplishments, but Torres has the other components that media and advertising personnel want. While Torres is twice the age of most of her closet swimming competitors, she is also a symbol of health, beauty, and longevity.
Torres' success outside the pool, however, is not new. For one, she has a lucrative and ongoing sponsorship deal with Team Speedo, the mega-successful swimsuit manufacturer, which includes media and retail appearances. Among other deals, Torres also has a deal with Toyota to produce Dara Torres swim clinics.
Torres has also been somewhat of a media personality. As swimmingworldmagazine.com reports, Torres has provided sports commentary on NBC, ESPN, Fox Sports Net, and even as a host for USA Network’s “PGA Tour Sunday.”
She has also been a TV personality as co-host and correspondent on such top-rated programs as “Live with Regis and Kelly” and “Good Morning America.” Other television work includes “NHL Cool Shots” (ESPN), “Fox Sports Sunday”, “Inside Edition”, and the “Tae-Bo” workout videotapes, swimmingworldmagazine.com reports.
Look to see a lot more of Dara Torres this year, and beyond. Also look for her to expand her sponsorship and advertising deals outside the area of sports. Particularly likely are product deals pertaining to women's fashion, health, and beauty. Any medals in Beijing for Torres, should turn to gold.
Here is an article on Torres' recent accomplishments from the Miami Herald (Same old story for Torres) an article from NYTimes.com (Dara Torres - Profile - Olympic Swimming) and the above referenced article from swimmingworldmagazine.com (Lane 9 News).
Not only are her accomplishments important Olympic accomplishments, but Torres has the other components that media and advertising personnel want. While Torres is twice the age of most of her closet swimming competitors, she is also a symbol of health, beauty, and longevity.
Torres' success outside the pool, however, is not new. For one, she has a lucrative and ongoing sponsorship deal with Team Speedo, the mega-successful swimsuit manufacturer, which includes media and retail appearances. Among other deals, Torres also has a deal with Toyota to produce Dara Torres swim clinics.
Torres has also been somewhat of a media personality. As swimmingworldmagazine.com reports, Torres has provided sports commentary on NBC, ESPN, Fox Sports Net, and even as a host for USA Network’s “PGA Tour Sunday.”
She has also been a TV personality as co-host and correspondent on such top-rated programs as “Live with Regis and Kelly” and “Good Morning America.” Other television work includes “NHL Cool Shots” (ESPN), “Fox Sports Sunday”, “Inside Edition”, and the “Tae-Bo” workout videotapes, swimmingworldmagazine.com reports.
Look to see a lot more of Dara Torres this year, and beyond. Also look for her to expand her sponsorship and advertising deals outside the area of sports. Particularly likely are product deals pertaining to women's fashion, health, and beauty. Any medals in Beijing for Torres, should turn to gold.
Here is an article on Torres' recent accomplishments from the Miami Herald (Same old story for Torres) an article from NYTimes.com (Dara Torres - Profile - Olympic Swimming) and the above referenced article from swimmingworldmagazine.com (Lane 9 News).
Saturday, June 28, 2008
NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS RULES SMS TEXT-MESSAGING HAS PROTECTION UNDER THE FOURTH AMENDMENT
The Ninth Circuit has ruled on an important text-messaging privacy case. On Wednesday, June 18th, the Ninth Circuit held that text-messaging, known as SMS (short message service), has protection under the Fourth Amendment.
More specifically, the court ruled that, under the facts (Quon v. Arch Wireless), an employee is entitled to the privacy protections of the Fourth Amendment for text-messages that an employee sends, but an employer claims right to.
As the LA Times has reported, important to the ruling is the distinction between out-sourced and company-maintained email accounts. Regardless of the distinction, the Ninth Circuit decision makes clear that, just because a company finances or "maintains" the email accounts of its employees, that does not mean it has unlimited access to the messages sent within. Now, Fourth Amendment protections attach.
The ruling, the LA Times reports, will require the police to obtain a search warrant before they can access the email or text-messaging accounts of employees. In addition, the ruling gives all government workers Fourth Amendment protection against searches of emails and text-messages by the government employer.
Here is the LA Times article referenced, and another article on the ruling (Your boss shouldn't read your text or e-mail messages) (Let go of my texts--all 75000 of them! The 9th Circuit speaks).
More specifically, the court ruled that, under the facts (Quon v. Arch Wireless), an employee is entitled to the privacy protections of the Fourth Amendment for text-messages that an employee sends, but an employer claims right to.
As the LA Times has reported, important to the ruling is the distinction between out-sourced and company-maintained email accounts. Regardless of the distinction, the Ninth Circuit decision makes clear that, just because a company finances or "maintains" the email accounts of its employees, that does not mean it has unlimited access to the messages sent within. Now, Fourth Amendment protections attach.
The ruling, the LA Times reports, will require the police to obtain a search warrant before they can access the email or text-messaging accounts of employees. In addition, the ruling gives all government workers Fourth Amendment protection against searches of emails and text-messages by the government employer.
Here is the LA Times article referenced, and another article on the ruling (Your boss shouldn't read your text or e-mail messages) (Let go of my texts--all 75000 of them! The 9th Circuit speaks).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)