By Dan Levine
SAN JOSE, Calif, Jan 17 (Reuters) - Internal emails show
that executives at tech companies such as Apple and Google
believed that an agreement to refrain from poaching each other's
workers would bring real financial benefits, a U.S. judge said
on Thursday.
Five former employees of various tech companies have filed a
civil lawsuit against Apple Inc, Google Inc, Intel Corp and
others, alleging an illegal conspiracy to eliminate competition
for each other's employees.
At a hearing in San Jose, California federal court on
Thursday, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh also ordered Apple Chief
Executive Tim Cook to be questioned by plaintiff attorneys for
four hours.
Koh must decide whether the lawsuit can proceed as a class
action, which would give the plaintiffs more leverage to extract
a large settlement. Koh said that at the time the no-poaching
agreements were forged, top executives felt a collective
approach toward hiring was more efficient than dealing with
employees individually.
"That, I think, is the biggest problem for the defendants,"
said Koh, who did not identify the executives. However, Koh also
closely questioned a key economic analysis commissioned by the
plaintiffs, which the judge said had "holes."
Koh did not rule on the class action issue during the
hearing on Thursday.
In 2010, Google, Apple, Adobe Systems Inc, Intel, Intuit Inc
and Walt Disney Co's Pixar unit agreed to a settlement of a U.S.
Justice Department probe that bars them from agreeing to refrain
from poaching each other's employees.
The Justice Department and California state antitrust
regulators then sued eBay Inc late last year over an alleged
no-poaching deal with Intuit. eBay said the government is wrong,
and has not been named as a defendant in the civil lawsuit.
Plaintiff attorneys have estimated that civil damages
potentially could run into hundreds of millions of dollars.
In court on Thursday, Adobe attorney Robert Mittelsta e dt
s aid the plaintiffs had no evidence that employees were actually
impacted by the no-cold call deals.
"It's not in the data," Mittelstaedt said.
In 2007, Apple's Steve Jobs asked former Google Chief
Executive Eric Schmidt to stop trying to recruit an Apple
engineer, a transgression that threatened one junior Google
employee's job, according to a court filing last year. At the
time, Schmidt was an Apple board member.
Koh on Thursday criticized attorneys for the tech companies
for being too slow to schedule depositions of top executives.
Apple attorney George Riley attempted to spare Cook from a
deposition, saying that when Cook was chief operating officer
(COO) of the company before succeeding Jobs in 2011, Cook had no
role in any of the no-hire agreements.
"I find it hard to believe a COO would have no say over
salary and compensation for all employees," Koh responded.
Additionally, Google attorneys agreed that Schmidt, now
Google's executive chairman, could be questioned by plaintiffs'
lawyers on Feb. 20. Executives from several other companies were
also scheduled for depositions, including Intel chief executive
Paul Otellini.
The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of
California is In Re: High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation,
11-cv-2509.
Follow us on Twitter @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook