The High Tech Industry: Explain the Outcome of the Case (Essay Sample)

The High Tech Industry
United States v. Adobe Systems, Inc., Apple Inc., Google Inc., Intel Corporation, Intuit, Inc., and Pixar
Name
Section 1. Overview of the Case
Among the most recent cases regarding telecommunications companies in the past decade is the United States v. Adobe Systems, Inc., Apple Inc., Google Inc., Intel Corporation, Intuit Inc., and Pixar case. Acting under the direction of the attorney general, the United States of America filed a civil antitrust action to acquire equitable relief against the defendants mentioned in the preceding section, who were the principal participants in the case. Accordingly, the action challenged five bilateral no-cold-call agreements among the companies under section 1 of the Sherman Act. It is worth noting that in the above case, the defendants compete for highly skilled technical workers, and they often solicit employees working at other companies to fill their job openings.
The leading behavior resulted in the reduction of the companies’ capability to compete for employees and, consequently, disrupted the normal price-setting mechanisms that apply in a labor setting. Apparently, the no-cold-call agreements hindered competition financially since they eliminated a significant form of competition to attract high tech workers, and, overall, substantially mitigated competition to the hurt of the affected employees, who were likely to suffer from the deprivation of competitively vital information. Moreover, they were denied access to better job opportunities. Notably, the agreements between the defendants were restraints of trade that are unlawful under the first section of the Sherman Act.
Section 2: Summary of the Legal Accusations in the Case
According to the United States, the six defendants in the case at hand entered into five similar agreements not to cold call employees. The first correspondence was between Apple and Google. Accordingly, beginning no later than 2006, the two firms came to an understanding not to cold call each other’s employees. Senior executives from both parties reached an express no cold call agreement through direct communication and further enforced the agreement through direct and explicit communication. It is important to point out that the employees were not informed neither did they agree to the restriction. The organizations policed potential breaches to their agreement through their senior executives.
The second accusation in the case was the deal between Apple and Adobe. Just like in the agreement between Apple and Google, beginning no later than May 2005, Apple and Adobe came to an agreement that they would cold-call each other's employees. Further, it is prudential to note that the agreement was settled upon and enforced through direct and explicit communication of executive officials. Moreover, the agreement was not limited by geography, period, product group, or job function, and employees were not aware of the deal.
Beginning no later than 2007, three similar agreements were made between Apple and Pixar, Google and Intuit, and Google and Intel. In the cases mentioned, the arrangements were made through direct and explicit communication between executive members of the companies in question. The employees were neither informed of the negotiations nor did they have any say in the matter. What is more, the firms placed each other in their internal “Do Not Call List” (Gürkaynak et al.). A compelling example regarding the preceding sentiments is the fact that Pixar instructed its human resource department to adhere to the agreement and to keep a paper trail to show that the company had not actively recruited job applicants from Apple.Section 3: Summary of any Analysis Relevant to the CaseIt is important for one to understand that the high-tech labor niche is characterized by both expertise and specialization. The defendants in the case often compete for experienced high tech employees, especially in the fields of computer science and engineering. Commonly, the competition takes the basis of salaries, career opportunities, and benefits for the said workers. In recent years, gifted computer engineers and scientists have been in high demand. In order to gain insight into the term “employee cold calling,” it is prudent to exemplify how it is used. The practice involves a firm communicating directly with another company’s employee who has not otherwise applied for a job opening in the said organization ("Complaint | ATR | Department of Justice"). In a funct...