Look the truth of the matter and the legal foundation IS:
Whenever a post starts this way it usually means opinion, not truth, is to follow.
1. He signed the agreement.
Which is
unenforceable in Papermaster's state, as well as Apple's. Unenforceable means "not legally binding".
2. It says you can't work in the industry with anyone that competes with IBM.
That is precisely the question before the court: does Apple compete with IBM? Perhaps the question will even be reduced to "will Papermaster's division (iPod/iPhone) compete with IBM?" When was the last time you saw an IBM phone? How about an IBM portable music player?
Therefor you are out of work in this arna for a year. So suck it up and quit snizling
Not necessarily true; many non-compete agreements are found to be unenforceable for some reason. Not to mention that, as already noted, Apple's state and Papermaster's both DO NOT ALLOW non-compete agreements.
I signed the same type agreement and had the same restrictions I lived with what i agreed to. So as I said be a MAN!
You never said "be a man" until now, but that's nitpicking. Maybe the one you signed was actually illegal in whole or in part and overly restrictive in what it required of you. Maybe your rights were trampled by your employer and you just let them walk all over you.
iTunes, iPod, iMac, iPhone, *not* Itunes, IPod, IMAC, iphone
MAC: Media Access Control, Mac: a brand of computers
