I think there are two types of employees. Those who work for others, and who work for themselves. There have always been people complaining about the company, management or partners. Others on the other hand are free in their work. All opinions are respected and are valid for each case.
And then there are the freelancers. That for a variety of reasons they are brave and wonderful and decide to work alone without having a potential employer. They decide to run the highest risk and deserve the credit. Gerard Williams got tired of working for Apple and decided to "go it alone." But it won't be easy.
Apple's judicial battle against Gerard Williams has begun, with the judge having already ruled on the earlier decisions of both parties. Let's explain who this man is and why he is so angry with the apple giant.
Gerard Williams worked for several years using the research and development department at Apple. He has been given leadership in the design of all A-series processors, from the A7 chip of the iPhone 5s in 2013 to the A12X mounting the current Pro.
Well, friend Williams left the company a few months ago to "do it on his own," as we incorrectly say. He founded his own chip development company, I think Apple would not be able to continue designing processors without it, and that in the long run, it would have no choice but to buy its new engineering. With two balls
Apparently, this decision did not please the company's leadership, either Apple has sued Williams
A preview of the case has already begun and representatives of both parties have already made their allegations and accusations between them. Currently Apple 2 to 1. Let's look at the objectives:
First Williams said Apple was trying to force a competitive clause that would be illegal under California law. So far, the judge has denied the allegation. 1-0
Second, the engineer suspects that the company has no right to monitor its messages, apparently shipped from an iPhone company. The judge has rejected you again. 2-0
However, Apple lost the third round. Company attorneys believe there is an adverse effect on Williams' actions, which could go beyond the harm caused by the company, acting as a warning to other potential "entrepreneurs". The judge ruled that it could only be admitted if the defendant's intentions were to harm Apple, and there was no evidence to prove that. 2-1.
We'll see how the game ends. From the outside it would be pointless to choose either one without having very detailed information on the topic. The a priori is both positive. Apple believes that technology is its asset, with Williams wanting to "ride his own." That's what the judges did for you.
It may interest you