oldbobcat, I'm that lawyer you're telling them to consult. I.P. assignment provisions of employment agreements ARE enforceable in every jurisdiction of which I'm aware -- certainly in the majority of jurisdictions, even outside the U.S. This is especially true if the invention/innovation was made within the same industry category. They are very rarely a problem, though. People who are smart enough to invent something are generally smart enough to have either (1) hired a lawyer who asks the right questions, or (2) read and understood their employment agreement. Companies can't afford not to enforce them and they will pursue the perp until they gain public satisfaction. I.P. is their life blood and they can't allow the appearance of letting employees walk off with it.

Non-competes, on the other hand, are hard to enforce. Won't often happen. But Specialized isn't going after them under a non-compete clause. I think you're confusing this with a non-compete case.

If Choi and Forsman wanted to do their own thing, they should have been smart enough to create a time gap and DOCUMENT that their back-of-napkin sketches were made after they left. It's a simple I.Q. test. Between the documentary evidence and the perps' public pronouncements, they are done. (Nightmare clients.)

Side issue . . . do you really want to buy a bike frame from guys so inattentive to basic details? I'm no Specialized fan (much the contrary after my Tarmac experience), but these guys would have been better served to wave a white flag and give Specialized their royalty. It would have been cheaper than legal fees.