Non-competes are restrictions on employees by their current employer. A non-compete agreement between a seller and buyer is perfectly fine.

▲

hn_acc1 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Technically, restrictions on employees by their FORMER employer. In theory (if valid), they could retain power over you for a time AFTER you are no longer employed.

A similar thing is often done during dismissal: sign away your rights to sue for wrongful dismissal in return for severance. In my case, almost a year's worth of pay seemed like a reasonable severance, so I took it and didn't argue.

▲

marcosdumay 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> A non-compete agreement between a seller and buyer is perfectly fine.

Well, it's up to market protection agencies to look at the specifics.

	▲	Beestie 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Not really. Individuals who can build a company are under no obligation to sell it to anyone placing unreasonable conditions on the sale. If I'm buying your company, I have a concern that you might pull of of the customers back (having started a new company) but the price I'm willing to offer you compensates you for the book of business you are selling to me. That's where non-solicitation clauses come in. I think the operative principal here is that employees are at a disadvantage w/r to employers. Buyers and sellers are not presumed to be at any disadvantage w/r to each other.