Break out the popcorn -- the battle over Mark Hurd is just beginning. Less than a day after the former Hewlett-Packard
Oracle was up nearly 6% today on news of Hurd's arrival. Should Oracle investors fear losing an experienced executive through subsequent legal tussles? Are we looking at a new era of rivalry between these Silicon Valley giants?
We asked three of our Foolish tech analysts to weigh in.
Rick Munarriz, Motley Fool Rule Breakers Analyst/Writer: Me-ow! I didn't think HP had this kind of catty and vindictive streak. If anything, I thought Hurd going to Oracle was actually doing HP a favor. He could have popped up as a high-ranking exec at Dell
Hurd reportedly didn't sign a non-compete clause as part of accepting his severance, so what's HP doing beyond drawing more attention to this summer's ugly episode? I figured the 3Par
At what time does The Real Housewives of Palo Alto go on, again?
Tim Beyers, Rule Breakers Analyst/Writer: Sometimes, the Oracle haters have a point. This isn't one of those times.
An HP spokesperson told The Wall Street Journal that HP intends to "enforce" agreements designed to protect trade secrets. But that's silly. Sure, HP has trade secrets, but the company also had to know Hurd would have no trouble landing a job and that a competitor would likely make an offer. Despite this, HP made no move to insert a non-compete clause in Hurd's severance agreement, the Journal reports.
Realizing its mistake, HP is now demanding Hurd not do his best to compete with HP after being hired into a job where he'll be competing with HP. (Sigh.)
Don't get me wrong; I've no issue with confidentiality agreements. I've signed plenty of them. And HP does have the right to protect its trade secrets. But unless Hurd came into the Oracle job spilling his guts about major accounts, HP has no claim. This is no more than a tactic -- similar in scope and style to IBM's suing of Apple when it hired chip designer Mark Papermaster to oversee the project that became the A4 chip. As such, I'm not taking this suit seriously, and neither should any other Oracle investor.
Anders Bylund, Fool.com Writer: When HP's board decided to kick Mark Hurd out on the street, it must have known that he would seek employment elsewhere. Moreover, unless there was an actual non-compete clause in his contract you would have to assume that he'd go to one of HP's direct competitors. After all, the IBM wannabe that HP has become under Hurd's watch is in direct competition with every IT shop that matters. Finally, would you really expect a man you fired for essentially a lack of common sense to adopt some sort of honor code with regards to trade secrets?
If HP can actually enforce its confidentially agreement, Hurd is in trouble again. That would give Oracle an excuse for backing out of what I see as a terrible mistake -- Ellison should send HP a thank-you note when it's all over. And if not, then HP made a series of unfortunate mistakes and will suffer the consequences of giving away its trade secrets. Tough luck.
What do you think about this Silicon Valley saga? Share your thoughts in the comments box below.
Tim Beyers owns shares and options of Apple. He also owns shares of both IBM and Oracle. Rick, Anders, and Eric don't own any of the stocks mentioned. Apple is a Motley Fool Stock Advisor recommendation. The Fool owns shares of Oracle. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. True to its name, The Motley Fool is made up of a motley assortment of writers and analysts, each with a unique perspective; sometimes we agree, sometimes we disagree, but we all believe in the power of learning from each other through our Foolish community. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.