Zach Spear
In a five-page Southern District of New York court filing dated yesterday, and signed by attorneys for both parties, Papermaster agrees to check in with Big Blue whenever he's not sure whether he's about to tread on confidential information. Â According to the document, the two sides reached the settlement last Friday.
Papermaster will also submit signed declarations, one in July and another in October, confirming he has not disclosed any of IBM's secrets nor does he intend to, under penalty of perjury. Â Similar arrangements are seldom seen publicly, although a case pitting two well-known companies like Apple and IBM has attracted more attention than most non-compete disputes. Â The agreement clears Papermaster to go back to work on April 24.
The full declaration he'll sign, which is due in the first two weeks of July, and again during the first two weeks of October, can be seen below in full.
If Papermaster has any questions over whether certain information is confidential or if he wants to disclose once-confidential IBM information, he will have to ask IBM Vice President and Assistant General Counsel Ron Lauderdale first. Â Lauderdale will make the determination "promptly, reasonably, and in good faith," and his decision is binding and not subject to review, meaning Papermaster risks a perjury conviction if he doesn't follow Lauderdale's directions.
These conditions expire on October 24, one year after Papermaster's departure from IBM. Â At that time, the lawsuit and countersuit will be dropped. Â If either or both parties violate the consent order, they could be held in contempt.
Any further terms of the settlement, financial or otherwise, were not listed in the court filings discovered by AppleInsider. Â Yesterday Apple announced Papermaster would be joining the company as chief of iPod and iPhone development in April, noting briefly that "The litigation between IBM and Mark Papermaster has been resolved."
AppleInsider Staff
Malcolm Owen
Oliver Haslam
Andrew O'Hara
Wesley Hilliard
William Gallagher
Christine McKee
29 Comments
With large companies laying people off by the thousands
how in the hell does an individual have to sign a declaration
to a former employer as a stipulation?
That is NOT a free market for employment and in my eyes a
breach of Papermaster's privacy.
Truth is IBM made the investment in Papermaster and there was
quid pro quo the got an outstanding employee. Had IBM sent
Papermaster packing to the unemployment line he'd have precious
few right to do anything but collect a pittance in UI benefits.
I think this was likely an agreement to provent a protracted legal
battle but I have a hard to believing that our Government would back
such frivolous cases.
Ridiculous.
Sounds like IBM lost, but had to get something out of the deal to save face and to make it appear like their fears could be justified.
As any serious development involving Papermaster experience will show first results long after this 6 month period, what is IBM going to win?
Papermaster will also submit signed declarations, one in July and another in October, confirming he has not disclosed any of IBM's secrets nor does he intend to, under penalty of perjury. Similar arrangements are seldom seen publicly, although a case pitting two well-known companies like Apple and IBM has attracted more attention than most non-compete disputes. The agreement clears Papermaster to go back to work on April 24.
Papermaster will join Apple 6 months after his appointment and submit 2 sworn declarations to the Court certifying that he has not disclosed or used in his work for Apple any of IBM's secret intellectual property. By agreeing to do so, Papermaster will be able to cut in half the duration of the one year non competition clause he signed just 2 years ago.
IBM was well within its rights to insist that the provisions of the non competition clause be enforced by Courts. By the way, intellectual property means that it belongs to IBM, just like physical goods.
Employees are not free to discard the non competition agreements they sign just because they restrict the employment they can seek.
Apple is familiar with non competition agreements and cannot ignore them. Steve Jobs and Apple are not free to steal the intellectual property which belongs to IBM.
Ridiculous.
Sounds like IBM lost, but had to get something out of the deal to save face and to make it appear like their fears could be justified.
I agree, what a bunch of butt-covering silliness. He can whisper anything he wants into Steve's ear.