504
US game devs celebrate as non-compete clauses, previously deemed 'a trash way to keep the talent', face a ban from the FTC—which would free up movement across the AAA industry (www.pcgamer.com)
submitted 2 years ago by [M] to c/games@sh.itjust.works
24 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

You didn't even read, he wasn't an executive when it happened.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    And this story wasn't written when it happened, if it actually happened the way he describes it (there's no source).

    I know the issues in the industry, I'm in it, and this is why the article has plenty of:

    Digging up stories of developers being directly impacted by noncompetes was a little tricky. Plenty of folks had seen the language in contracts, but not many had had them actually enforced.

    The story he describes as a kid is more akin to a slap suit. The IPs we build and the techs we make are still not protected by this, and the same cease and desist could be sent to a company where they think.you are using their tech.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    And this story wasn't written when it happened, if it actually happened the way he describes it (there's no source).

    "Your story proves my point"

    "No it doesn't"

    "In that case I question its authenticity!'

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    So because slap suits for ridiculous reasons exists we can use them as examples for any other case?

    It's funny you disregard that each argument I made is also made in the argument, and his little story is not part of the actual case, so its authenticity is irrelevant and doesn't make your point.

    You've been familiar with the story for an hour, give yourself a chance.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I was simply pointing out that you were fine with the story being used in an argument when you thought it supported you, and now that it's been pointed out that it doesn't you suddenly don't think it's valid to use at all.

    Really calls into question the authenticity of your arguments.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •