the Zealous

Enacted in 1872, section 16600 of the California Business & Professions Code proclaims that "every contract by which anyone is restrained from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind is to that extent void." Courts have "consistently affirmed that section 16600 evinces a settled legislative policy in favor of open competition and employee mobility." Edwards v. Arthur Anderson (Cal. S. Ct. 2008). Recent legislation has only strengthened the bite of the law, rendering non-compliance quite costly for businesses.

California and Massachusetts offer two contrasting lessons on the impact of non-competes in the technology industry. In contrast to California's policy of maximizing employee mobility, Massachusetts has long permitted non-competes, and even after reform legislation was passed in 2018, routinely enforces them.

This week marks the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on December 10, 1948. Promulgated in the darkness between the brutal horrors of World War II and the dawn of the Cold War, the power of its words has inspired numerous constitutions of nations and international human rights treaties. Above all, it stands as an exemplar of an international consensus of a kind that seems hopelessly unattainable today.

Subject to the termination provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall be effective from the date it is made and shall continue in force for a period of five years from the date it is made, and thereafter for successive five-year terms unless and until terminated by one year prior notice in writing by either party.

Does the "unless and until terminated" clause apply to the initial five year term and successive five year terms, or only to the latter?