California law requires Web sites to "conspicuously" display a privacy-policy link
May 30, 2008
Saul Hansell at the NY Times concludes that Google is in violation of the California Online Privacy Protection Act of 2003 because it doesn’t "conspicuously" display a link to its privacy policy.
Excerpt: "… a 2004 analysis by law firm Cooley Godward Kronish doesn’t list any other option for conspicuous notice other than placing the privacy policy itself or a link to it on a site’s home page. And the California Office of Information Security and Data Protection offers this recommendation to Web sites:
Use a conspicuous link on your home page containing the word “privacy.” Make the link conspicuous by using larger type than the surrounding text, contrasting color, or symbols that call attention to it.
Signed Google’s non-competition clause, then got laid off
April 12, 2008
According to a Valleywag report, Google asked employees of its recent acquisition DoubleClick to sign a new employment agreement. The employment agreement contained a non-competition clause and a non-solicitation clause. A week later, the lay-offs began.
Question: Will Google be able to prevent the laid-off DoubleClickers from going into competition? The comments to the Valleywag piece add up to a great general overview of some key legal issues, such as:
- in California, non-competition clauses for employees as such are pretty much unenforceable per se (but many of the DoubleClick employees were based in New York);
- in some states (such as Texas), non-compete clauses require separate consideration;
- even if a non-competition clause turns out to be unenforceable, a non-solicitation clause, prohibiting the former employee from trying to hire people away from the former employer, might be another story.