Apple, Google agree to pay over $300 million to settle conspiracy lawsuit

SAN FRANCISCO Fri Apr 25, 2014 3:39am IST

A Google logo is seen at the garage where the company was founded on Google's 15th anniversary in Menlo Park, California September 26, 2013. REUTERS/Stephen Lam/Files

A Google logo is seen at the garage where the company was founded on Google's 15th anniversary in Menlo Park, California September 26, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Stephen Lam/Files

Stocks

   

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Four major tech companies including Apple and Google have agreed to pay a total of $324 million to settle a lawsuit accusing them of conspiring to hold down salaries in Silicon Valley, sources familiar with the deal said, just weeks before a high profile trial had been scheduled to begin.

The settlement was disclosed in a court filing earlier on Thursday, which did not spell out terms.

Tech workers filed a class action lawsuit against Apple Inc (AAPL.O), Google Inc (GOOGL.O), Intel Inc (INTC.O) and Adobe Systems Inc (ADBE.O) in 2011, alleging they conspired to refrain from soliciting one another's employees in order to avert a salary war.

Trial had been scheduled to begin at the end of May on behalf of roughly 64,000 workers. Had the case gone to trial, plaintiffs would have asked a jury to award roughly $3 billion in damages, according to court filings. Under antitrust law, that could have then been tripled to $9 billion.

The case has been closely watched due to the potentially high damages award and a steady disclosure of emails in which Apple's late co-founder Steve Jobs, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt and some of their Silicon Valley rivals hatched plans to avoid poaching each other's prized engineers.

In one email exchange after a Google recruiter solicited an Apple employee, Schmidt told Jobs that the recruiter would be fired, court documents show. Jobs then forwarded Schmidt's note to a top Apple human resources executive with a smiley face.

Another exchange shows Google's human resources director asking Schmidt about sharing its no-cold call agreements with competitors. Schmidt, now the company's executive chairman, advised discretion.

"Schmidt responded that he preferred it be shared 'verbally, since I don't want to create a paper trail over which we can be sued later?'" he said, according to a court filing. The HR director agreed.

The companies had acknowledged entering into some no-hire agreements but disputed the allegation that they had conspired to drive down wages.

Spokespeople for Apple, Google and Intel declined to comment on the settlement, and an Adobe representative was not immediately available for comment. An attorney for the plaintiffs, Kelly Dermody of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, in a statement called the deal "an excellent resolution."

Corporate defendants in antitrust cases often agree among themselves what portion each will contribute towards a settlement, said Daniel Crane, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School. One likely formula would be to divide the damages based on how many employees each company has in the class, he said.

Apple, Google, Adobe and Intel in 2010 settled a U.S. Department of Justice probe by agreeing not to enter into such no-hire deals in the future. The four companies had since been fighting the civil antitrust class action.

Walt Disney Co's Pixar and Lucasfilm units (DIS.N) and Intuit Inc (INTU.O) had already agreed to a settlement, with Disney paying about $9 million and Intuit paying $11 million.

Any settlement must be approved by U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California. A hearing on final approval of the Intuit and Disney deals is scheduled for next week.

The plaintiffs and the companies will disclose principal terms of the settlement by May 27, according to the court filing on Thursday, though it is unclear whether that will spell out what each company will pay.

Some Silicon Valley companies refused to enter into no-hire agreements. Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg, for instance, rebuffed an entreaty from Google in 2008 that they refrain from poaching each other's employees.

Additionally, Apple's Jobs threatened Palm with a patent lawsuit if Palm didn't agree to stop soliciting Apple employees. However, then Palm Chief Executive Edward Colligan told Jobs that the plan was "likely illegal," and that Palm was not "intimidated" by the threat.

The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California is In Re: High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation, 11-cv-2509.

(Reporting by Dan Levine, editing by Peter Henderson)

FILED UNDER:
Comments (0)
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.

  • Most Popular
  • Most Shared

Diplomacy

REUTERS SHOWCASE

Maruti Results

Maruti Results

Maruti Suzuki says profits helped by sentiment, not growth.  Full Article 

Tracking the Monsoon

Tracking the Monsoon

Monsoon turns patchy after revival.  Full Article 

ICICI Profit Up

ICICI Profit Up

ICICI Bank Q1 net profit up 17 percent, beats estimates.  Full Article 

Pharma Sector

Pharma Sector

FDA raises concern over drug production process at Cadila  Full Article 

Coal India

Coal India

Some Coal India mines may be run by foreign firms - minister  Full Article 

Fuel Prices

Fuel Prices

IOC to cut petrol prices by 1.5 pct from Friday  Read 

Economic Pulse

Economic Pulse

India's infrastructure output growth hits 9-month high in June  Full Article | Related Story 

Joint Bid

Joint Bid

ONGC, Oil India bid $1.5 bln for stake in Murphy Oil's Malaysia assets - sources  Full Article 

Reuters India Mobile

Reuters India Mobile

Get the latest news on the go. Visit Reuters India on your mobile device.  Full Coverage