Comments on: Who in the world is Kai-Fu Lee?

Two sides of a court battle paint very different portraits of ex-Microsoft exec hired to head Google's operations in China.

is it reasonable

Win lose or draw in this case - is/was it reasonable for M$ to say "come work for us. But if/when you leave us at a future date, we are going to stop you pusuing your chose career".

Dr. Lee is not your average developer. But is it reasonable for a company to try to stop you doing the one thing you're qualified to do ?

I understand the desire to try to protect a company against poaching. But I don't see how non-competes are in any way the right answer. I think this is another case of M$ being M$. I hope Google & Dr. Lee win.

[Andrew J Glina]

Perhaps

But he could have given Microsoft some warning. He acts dishonest so maybe he should be treated that way.

is it reasonable

Win lose or draw in this case - is/was it reasonable for M$ to say "come work for us. But if/when you leave us at a future date, we are going to stop you pusuing your chose career".

Dr. Lee is not your average developer. But is it reasonable for a company to try to stop you doing the one thing you're qualified to do ?

I understand the desire to try to protect a company against poaching. But I don't see how non-competes are in any way the right answer. I think this is another case of M$ being M$. I hope Google & Dr. Lee win.

[Andrew J Glina]

Perhaps

But he could have given Microsoft some warning. He acts dishonest so maybe he should be treated that way.

Lee and Google are wrong on this

Let's not get side-tracked by the big companies involved in this--this is about Lee violatiing a contract. Let's look at the facts:

1) Lee signed a noncompete agreement. This doesn't preclude him from ever working for a another company, just that he cannot leverage his knowledge of MS tech for one year if that information is used by a direct competitor. This is clearly the case here.

2) Lee has been a key player in MS China (he even started Microsoft Research), he's been very active with speech as well as search. For Google to suggest otherwise is simply untrue.

Shame on you Lee. Good luck inspiring other technologists in the field when you can't lead by example.

[takata]

the debate of hugh

mr. lee enjoys living freely. he is not owned and it is his marvelous brains after all. do you or have you worked at msft? do you want this guy to not feel good about him self? ypu have people who worked at ibm and mac at msft. me personaly i hope he achieves what he wants to accomlish? for my accomplishments: a burrito and a beer. i have low aspirations. better late than never / the article is old but i'm catching up/

Lee and Google are wrong on this

Let's not get side-tracked by the big companies involved in this--this is about Lee violatiing a contract. Let's look at the facts:

1) Lee signed a noncompete agreement. This doesn't preclude him from ever working for a another company, just that he cannot leverage his knowledge of MS tech for one year if that information is used by a direct competitor. This is clearly the case here.

2) Lee has been a key player in MS China (he even started Microsoft Research), he's been very active with speech as well as search. For Google to suggest otherwise is simply untrue.

Shame on you Lee. Good luck inspiring other technologists in the field when you can't lead by example.

[takata]

the debate of hugh

mr. lee enjoys living freely. he is not owned and it is his marvelous brains after all. do you or have you worked at msft? do you want this guy to not feel good about him self? ypu have people who worked at ibm and mac at msft. me personaly i hope he achieves what he wants to accomlish? for my accomplishments: a burrito and a beer. i have low aspirations. better late than never / the article is old but i'm catching up/