Judge Koh orders Apple CEO Tim Cook to four hours of questioning in anti-poaching case

“California Judge Lucy Koh on Thursday ordered Apple chief executive Tim Cook to four hours of questioning in relation to an anti-poaching case leveled against five large tech companies, including Google and Intel,” AppleInsider reports.

“According to in-court reports from Reuters, the anti-poaching case involves five former employees of tech industry heavyweights Apple, Google, Intel and others, who filed a civil suit alleging the companies illegally instituted anti-poaching measures,” AppleInsider reports. “Apple counsel argued that Cook was not involved in the anti-poaching allegations as he was the company’s chief operating officer at the time, but Judge Koh said he will still be subject to a deposition. ‘I find it hard to believe a COO would have no say over salary and compensation for all employees,’ Koh said.”

AppleInsider reports, “In addition to Cook, Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt will also be questioned on Feb. 20, while top ranking officials from the other defendants, including Intel’s Paul Otellini, are also slated to take part in upcoming depositions.”

Read more in the full article here.

Related articles:
Apple, Google, Intel, Adobe, Intuit, Pixar, and Lucasfilm fail to get staff-poaching antitrust lawsuit dismissed – April 19, 2012
Court filing: Steve Jobs told Google’s Schmidt to stop poaching workers – January 27, 2012
Google battles to keep talent; gives 10% raise to 23,000 employees – November 11, 2010
Did Apple and Google make an anti-poaching deal? – August 9, 2009


  1. Come Feb 20th, lets hope the mole is Cooked.
    sWeeeeet justice.

    This is all heating up very well…
    INdepWel, Gargooyle and MacroSloth all need to come clean.
    The Apple is getting waxed and will shine.

    1. Yeah… I’m sure Cook determines Apple janitor’s salary. Because, you know, CEOs have nothing better to do than determine every last employees wages.

      I’m beginning to suspect Koh hasn’t a clue as to how businesses actually function.

      And why is she on another case involving Apple? Don’t they have enough judges in California?

  2. Koh sputtered, “I find it hard to believe a COO would have no say over salary and compensation for all employees.”

    Of course, you would, Judge Koh, because you’re too fracking stupid to understand the role of a Chief OPERATING Officer.

  3. When (if) this case comes to trial Apple will be raked over the coals by the media and their stock will take yet another hit. The other companies will get a free ride from the press and their stick may even rise.

    Me, cynical? Nope. I just learn from history.

      1. I believe only Hitler and his henchmen believed that wasting a citizen’s time asking irrelevant questions and sending them to the gas chambers was acceptable behaviour. But I don’t know what Judge Judy’s legal standards are, probably lower than Herr Hitler’s.

        1. I guess I should have known better than to engage you in conversation and expect anything other than insane blather..

          A judicial inquiry is equal to genocide in your twisted little hyperbole world is it? It is completely unreasonable for the court to ask the guy in charge what he knows?

          I guess I forgot that in America when you run a corporation you are above the law and can do what ever you want…

        2. Look, in an organisation the size of Apple’s there are clearly delineated lines of authority. At the top of the hiring pyramid so to speak is the human resource director. As to formulation of policies associated with hiring and firing and ‘illegal handcuffs’ preventing the employee from working elsewhere, the HR director would be the person most closely associated with formulating such policies and should be the person put on the stand.

          Grilling the COO and CEO of the company with regard to hiring practices over 4 hours is the equivalent of abuse of judicial powers. Just because you have those powers and are empowered to exercise them doesn’t mean you are entitled to exercise them in a mindless manner.

    1. Silicon valley execs collude to limit employees career options, essentially making the employees status: work here or work nowhere, we own you. And you think it is inappropriate for the judge to take some of the biggest silicon valley ceo’s time to ask questions about it?

      What an obedient little corporate slave you make.

      1. @ Truth. One has a choice. If you choose a super huge wage packet on condition that you do not leave over a given period and that when you do leave, you will not work for a rival for at least a given period. If you are then compensated at the end of that period enough to cover the period in which you are not to engage with a rival business and perhaps enough to never need to work again or to set up your own business. How is that limiting your career?

  4. In the early days of retail, there was definitely an anti-poaching rule between Apple, Best Buy, and several other retailers. On several occasions I was told to stand down on a recruit because ‘we can’t take managers from them’.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.