Jump to content
1032004

Cael trolling FloKaren - NLWC event 9/19?

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, AnklePicker said:

Your ire is misguided. You should be mad about the law not the fact that businesses utilize them. Don’t hate the player hate the game. 

People aren't allowed to be mad at both the law and entities that utilize them?  What about a law that is unjust?  It is legal to take upskirt photos of women in Georgia:  https://time.com/4422772/upskirt-photos-harassment/  If someone took one of these photos of your wife/mother/daughter/sister, you would not be allowed to be mad at the person who took the photos, according to your philosophy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, BobDole said:

Different industries and different levels of knowing proprietary information will determine if a company requires one. 

Think about these types of people are not signing them, which is a LARGE portion of people in the workforce.
Fast food employees
Manufacturing employees
Construction
Government(not sure exactly, but their aren't many competitors)
Teachers

These are just some examples of large portions of employees that would not need a non-compete.
 

The late senator's last post is an important one when discussing the "1 in 5" statistic.  The vast majority of the workforce is not in a field that would have any need of a non-compete.  Mostly you're talking about businesses with proprietary information (as Mr. Dole mentioned) or a field where you would be bringing an existing customer base (like a book of business or an audience).  Think about Conan O'Brien not being on TV for awhile after he was robbed of the Tonight Show, there are countless examples in this area.  I don't think there's anything nefarious, legally speaking, in having a non-compete here.  It's not great for Willie himself, obviously, but as mentioned, nobody required him to work there, and there was mutual benefit to both parties.  Willie provided a lot of great content (and still does), Flo dramatically increased Willie's profile and marketability.  Maybe the most infamous example of something similar is Disney.  If you're a Disney artist, they own everything you draw while you work for them.  Everything.  Even at home.  Don't want to do that?  Don't work at Disney.  My cousin was a very talented artist and had that same thing happen to him at Disney.

Either way, as previously stated, the enforcability of the agreements vary by stat but typically depend on a determination of "Reasonableness" with no real definition of the term.  I don't think the 1 year is going to qualify as unreasonable.  Also, he was allowed to produce content, but not videos, wasn't that the original ruling?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the Texas statute for those interested (I have deleted subsection b from this because it's related to medical practices only, so has no bearing here):

(a) Notwithstanding Section 15.05 of this code, and subject to any applicable provision of Subsection (b), a covenant not to compete is enforceable if it is ancillary to or part of an otherwise enforceable agreement at the time the agreement is made to the extent that it contains limitations as to time, geographical area, and scope of activity to be restrained that are reasonable and do not impose a greater restraint than is necessary to protect the goodwill or other business interest of the promisee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

Either way, as previously stated, the enforcability of the agreements vary by stat but typically depend on a determination of "Reasonableness" with no real definition of the term.  I don't think the 1 year is going to qualify as unreasonable.  Also, he was allowed to produce content, but not videos, wasn't that the original ruling?

Pretty much, except my understanding is that essentially the reason for the hearing was because Karen also felt he wasn’t allowed to write about fantasy wrestling, recruiting, or tweet/retweet anything that could be perceived as negative about Flo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Pretty much, except my understanding is that essentially the reason for the hearing was because Karen also felt he wasn’t allowed to write about fantasy wrestling, recruiting, or tweet/retweet anything that could be perceived as negative about Flo.

I haven't watched the hearing (I have enough legal hearings in my life), but I assume that was shot down?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Pretty much, except my understanding is that essentially the reason for the hearing was because Karen also felt he wasn’t allowed to write about fantasy wrestling, recruiting, or tweet/retweet anything that could be perceived as negative about Flo.

And the definition of "future events," don't forget that one.

From what I can understand Karen only wants to allow him to write basically preview articles and "editorial comments," whatever that is. Willie and his team define future events as events happening after the injunction started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

I haven't watched the hearing (I have enough legal hearings in my life), but I assume that was shot down?

I don’t think the judge made any specific rulings honestly.  At one point I think she said she didn’t feel any of it was “an emergency,” so I guess some may consider that being “shot down.”

It basically ended with her urging them to settle otherwise they are going to trial, and made sure to point out that the original ruling expired in November anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having litigated many of these on both sides, some are written better than others.  As referenced above, they are frequently used in areas where particular knowledge of a device, system (Flo’s system?), customer list or pricing schedule are important to the company seeking to protect them.  Sometimes poor drafting doesn’t lead to the problem.  It may just be the facts.  For instance, if a customer list can be generated in a non-protected way, the non-compete likely won’t be enforced if the customer list is the issue.  Same with pricing schedule.  Non-competes with confidential information restraints are frequently the utility a company uses to protect themselves.

Length of term and geography are also critical components.  The non-compete portion is to prevent unfair competition after an employee gains experience and  knowledge in a field then leaves, likely for more money, to turn around and compete with the employer using what they learned.

One thing on a human level that has perturbed me about these: if you gave your word, in writing, not to compete then why not just keep your word?  Money?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, jchapman said:

People aren't allowed to be mad at both the law and entities that utilize them?  What about a law that is unjust?  It is legal to take upskirt photos of women in Georgia:  https://time.com/4422772/upskirt-photos-harassment/  If someone took one of these photos of your wife/mother/daughter/sister, you would not be allowed to be mad at the person who took the photos, according to your philosophy.

 

Not true. 

https://www.wtoc.com/story/35374035/gov-deal-signs-upskirt-photo-law/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

I don’t think the judge made any specific rulings honestly.  At one point I think she said she didn’t feel any of it was “an emergency,” so I guess some may consider that being “shot down.”

It basically ended with her urging them to settle otherwise they are going to trial, and made sure to point out that the original ruling expired in November anyway.

Correct, no ruling yet. You could tell how ticked off the judge was with the whole thing though.  But the point of FloSports was never to actually win this case. All they want to do is to try to drain Rokfin of resources via lawsuits and Willie is unfortunately a pawn in that. Even once the non compete expires, Flo’s lawyers said they will try to extend it for a year by claiming it was followed. Once again, the point being to create more paperwork and lawyer bills for Rokfin/Willie. 

Edited by Billyhoyle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VakAttack said:

The late senator's last post is an important one when discussing the "1 in 5" statistic.  The vast majority of the workforce is not in a field that would have any need of a non-compete.  Mostly you're talking about businesses with proprietary information (as Mr. Dole mentioned) or a field where you would be bringing an existing customer base (like a book of business or an audience).  Think about Conan O'Brien not being on TV for awhile after he was robbed of the Tonight Show, there are countless examples in this area.  I don't think there's anything nefarious, legally speaking, in having a non-compete here.  It's not great for Willie himself, obviously, but as mentioned, nobody required him to work there, and there was mutual benefit to both parties.  Willie provided a lot of great content (and still does), Flo dramatically increased Willie's profile and marketability.  Maybe the most infamous example of something similar is Disney.  If you're a Disney artist, they own everything you draw while you work for them.  Everything.  Even at home.  Don't want to do that?  Don't work at Disney.  My cousin was a very talented artist and had that same thing happen to him at Disney.

Either way, as previously stated, the enforcability of the agreements vary by stat but typically depend on a determination of "Reasonableness" with no real definition of the term.  I don't think the 1 year is going to qualify as unreasonable.  Also, he was allowed to produce content, but not videos, wasn't that the original ruling?

I think you’d be surprised who has to sign non compete clauses, fast food workers, security guards etc. It’s not just about intellectual property but about money and resources spent on hiring and training. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jchapman said:

People aren't allowed to be mad at both the law and entities that utilize them?  What about a law that is unjust?  It is legal to take upskirt photos of women in Georgia:  https://time.com/4422772/upskirt-photos-harassment/  If someone took one of these photos of your wife/mother/daughter/sister, you would not be allowed to be mad at the person who took the photos, according to your philosophy.

You can be mad I guess all you want, but if you want to make change I’d suggest looking at the game not the player which apparently is exactly what Georgia did. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, jchapman said:

Ok, it was legal until three years ago.  Kinda like Jim Crow laws, etc were at one time legal.  The mental exercise remains the same.

It was only "legal" because upskirting is a relatively new thing with cell phone technology and existing Georgia law wasn't written well enough to outright make it illegal. Once cases were brought they rewrote the law as one would expect. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm more perturbed that FloSports has hired a lawyer that doesn't understand technology as simple as email. She is either dimwitted or is good at playing dumb on knowing how technology works. Rokfin's lawyer can't even figure out Zoom, so both sides aren't exactly winning in that department.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BobDole said:

I'm more perturbed that FloSports has hired a lawyer that doesn't understand technology as simple as email. She is either dimwitted or is good at playing dumb on knowing how technology works. Rokfin's lawyer can't even figure out Zoom, so both sides aren't exactly winning in that department.

Also, in a wrestling-specific case, she couldn't pronounce "Kyle" Sanderson's name correctly...here's a hint: It's Cael...one syllable...just the way it looks.

That's like somebody mispronouncing Michael Jordan's name in a hearing about pumpkin-pushing, or mispronouncing Donald Trump's name in a hearing about politics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SetonHallPirate said:

Also, in a wrestling-specific case, she couldn't pronounce "Kyle" Sanderson's name correctly...here's a hint: It's Cael...one syllable...just the way it looks.

That's like somebody mispronouncing Michael Jordan's name in a hearing about pumpkin-pushing, or mispronouncing Donald Trump's name in a hearing about politics.

Have you heard about Cael Valencia?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, AnklePicker said:

I wanna say too that I respect Cael’s take on Flo and if I were him, I’d probably keep them at arm’s length as well.  Cael keeps it classy and dignified and Flo, well not so much all of the time. Had they just been a bit more professional, Martin and Willie included, they could have even had guys like Cael on board. But being a pro comes with experience and I think they’ve improved in that regard but still have a long way to go and I’m glad Cael helps keep them in check.  

I think Caels reclusive behavior is kinda selfish. Everyone wants to hear from the guy, and I honestly think his silence is motivated more by his Machiavellian tendencies than his sense of dignity. 

He do consider him very dignified though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, hammerlockthree said:

I think Caels reclusive behavior is kinda selfish. Everyone wants to hear from the guy, and I honestly think his silence is motivated more by his Machiavellian tendencies than his sense of dignity. 

He do consider him very dignified though. 

Seems only reclusive when it comes to Flo. His other interviews are generally very good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...