Why Are Employment Agreements Critical for AI Companies?
AI companies depend on specialized talent including machine learning researchers, data scientists, AI engineers, and product developers who create valuable intellectual property and possess sensitive competitive information. Without properly structured employment agreements, companies risk employees taking innovations to competitors, departing staff recruiting entire teams, and trade secrets being disclosed after employment ends.
Well-drafted employment agreements establish IP ownership, protect confidential information and trade secrets, restrict post-employment competitive activities, and prevent employee solicitation and raiding. For AI startups and established companies alike, these agreements are foundational to protecting investments in innovation and maintaining competitive advantages.
However, employment agreement enforceability varies significantly by jurisdiction. Recent regulatory changes including FTC non-compete bans and state restrictions on restrictive covenants require companies to navigate evolving legal landscapes carefully while protecting legitimate business interests.
IP Assignment Provisions
Comprehensive Assignment Language
Employment agreements should assign all work-related IP to the company including inventions, discoveries, and improvements, copyrightable works and code, trade secrets and know-how, and any other intellectual property created during employment.
Assignments should cover IP created using company resources, relating to company business, or resulting from work performed for the company.
Work-Made-For-Hire Designation
Include work-made-for-hire language stating that works created within employment scope are company property. While this may be legally redundant with employment relationship, explicit designation provides additional clarity.
Pre-Invention Disclosures
Require employees to list prior inventions they’re excluding from assignment. This prevents disputes about whether specific IP was created before or during employment.
Excluded inventions might include previous academic research, side projects unrelated to company business, or inventions from prior employment.
Future Invention Assignment
Include automatic assignment provisions for future inventions created during employment. Some jurisdictions limit enforceability of future invention assignments, but they remain valid for work-related innovations in most contexts.
State-Specific Limitations
California Labor Code Section 2870 and similar laws in other states prohibit assignment of inventions developed entirely on employee’s own time without company resources, not relating to employer’s business, and not resulting from work performed for employer.
Employment agreements must include notices about these limitations and carve out protections for legitimately excluded inventions.
Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Provisions
Defining Confidential Information
Clearly define what constitutes confidential information including trade secrets like algorithms and model architectures, technical information including training data and methodologies, business information covering strategies and customer lists, and product roadmaps and research directions.
Avoid overly broad definitions that courts might find unenforceable while ensuring meaningful protection.
Obligations During Employment
Employees must use confidential information only for authorized business purposes, maintain information in confidence, follow security policies and procedures, and report unauthorized disclosures.
Post-Employment Confidentiality
Confidentiality obligations should survive employment termination indefinitely for trade secrets and for defined periods (typically 3-5 years) for other confidential information.
Surviving obligations prevent departing employees from using or disclosing proprietary information at new employers.
Permitted Disclosures
Specify when disclosure is permitted including as required by court order or legal process, to professional advisors under confidentiality obligations, and pursuant to DTSA whistleblower protections.
Include DTSA-required notice about whistleblower immunity for confidential disclosure to government officials.
Non-Compete Agreements
Current Legal Landscape
Non-compete enforceability varies dramatically by jurisdiction. California generally prohibits non-competes except in narrow circumstances. Many states enforce reasonable non-competes, considering duration, geographic scope, and scope of restricted activities.
The FTC proposed a nationwide ban on non-competes in 2023, though final rules remain uncertain and face legal challenges. Companies should monitor regulatory developments closely.
Elements of Enforceable Non-Competes
Where permitted, enforceable non-competes require reasonable duration (typically 6-24 months), appropriate geographic scope tied to where company operates or competes, and narrow activity restrictions related to employee’s role and company interests.
Courts strike down overly broad restrictions as unreasonable restraints on trade.
Consideration Requirements
Non-competes must be supported by adequate consideration. For new hires, employment itself typically suffices. For existing employees, additional consideration like promotions, bonuses, or continued employment may be required.
AI-Specific Competitive Restrictions
For AI companies, focus restrictions on direct competition involving similar AI technologies, products, or markets, use of company’s proprietary techniques or approaches, and work on substantially similar projects or applications.
Avoid restrictions so broad they prevent employment in entire AI industry.
Non-Solicitation Agreements
Employee Non-Solicitation
Prevent departing employees from recruiting former colleagues through restrictions on soliciting employees to leave the company, hiring employees within specified periods after employee departure, and encouraging employees to breach their obligations.
Employee non-solicitation is generally more enforceable than non-compete clauses, as it protects against team raiding without completely restricting employment.
Customer Non-Solicitation
Protect customer relationships by prohibiting soliciting customers with whom employee worked, providing services to customers employee serviced, and interfering with customer contracts.
Limit to customers employee had meaningful contact with during employment to avoid overbreadth.
Reasonable Scope and Duration
Non-solicitation restrictions should be limited to 12-24 months typically, specific categories of employees or customers, and activities constituting active solicitation versus passive acceptance.
Garden Leave and Notice Periods
Garden Leave Provisions
Garden leave places departing employees on paid leave during notice periods, preventing them from working for competitors immediately while preserving confidentiality. This gives companies time to protect interests before employee transitions to competitor.
Garden leave must comply with employment laws and may require continued salary and benefits.
Extended Notice Requirements
Require senior employees or those with access to highly sensitive information to provide extended notice (e.g., 30-90 days) before departure.
Extended notice allows transition planning and reducing knowledge concentration risks.
Return of Property and Information
Property Return Obligations
Upon termination, employees must return all company property including devices and equipment, documents and files, access credentials, and copies of confidential information in any form.
Specify that obligations include deleting company information from personal devices.
Certification of Compliance
Require departing employees to certify in writing that they’ve returned all property and information and haven’t retained copies or disclosed confidential information.
While not foolproof, certifications create evidence for enforcement actions if violations occur.
Enforcement Mechanisms
Injunctive Relief
Employment agreements should state that violations may cause irreparable harm warranting injunctive relief, enabling companies to seek immediate court orders preventing competitive employment, stopping solicitation activities, or requiring return of confidential information.
Liquidated Damages
Some agreements include liquidated damages provisions specifying predetermined amounts for breaches. These can provide certainty but must represent reasonable estimates of actual damages to be enforceable.
Attorney Fees
Include provisions allowing prevailing party to recover attorney fees in disputes, which can deter violations and facilitate enforcement.
Special Considerations for Executives and Key Personnel
Enhanced Restrictions
Executives and senior employees with extensive access to strategy and confidential information may be subject to longer non-compete periods, broader geographic restrictions, and more comprehensive non-solicitation clauses.
Courts are more likely to enforce stricter restrictions on highly compensated executives than rank-and-file employees.
Equity Forfeiture Provisions
Unvested equity grants may include forfeiture clauses triggered by competitive employment or solicitation. These “clawback” provisions incentivize compliance.
Ensure forfeiture provisions comply with applicable law and equity plan terms.
Alternatives to Traditional Non-Competes
Non-Disclosure as Primary Protection
In jurisdictions prohibiting non-competes, strong confidentiality obligations combined with trade secret protection may provide sufficient safeguards.
Focus on preventing disclosure and use of confidential information rather than employment itself.
Incentive-Based Retention
Long-term equity vesting, retention bonuses, and deferred compensation can economically discourage departures to competitors without restrictive covenants.
Customer and Employee Loyalty Programs
Building strong relationships with customers and employees reduces solicitation risks and makes restrictive covenants less necessary.
Interstate and International Considerations
Choice of Law Provisions
When employees work in multiple states or internationally, specify which jurisdiction’s law governs employment agreements. This creates predictability though courts may not always honor these provisions if they conflict with employee protections.
Compliance with Multiple Jurisdictions
For distributed workforces, ensure employment agreements comply with most restrictive applicable laws or create jurisdiction-specific agreement variations.
Onboarding and Off-boarding Best Practices
Onboarding Procedures
Provide clear explanation of IP and confidentiality obligations during onboarding, have employees acknowledge receipt and understanding, and train on security policies and trade secret protection.
Exit Interviews and Reminders
Conduct exit interviews reviewing confidentiality obligations, prohibitions on taking confidential information, and restrictions on competitive employment and solicitation.
Provide written reminders of continuing obligations.
Conclusion: Balancing Protection and Talent Attraction
Employment agreements are essential tools for protecting AI company innovations, but they must balance legitimate business interests against employee rights and talent market realities. Overly restrictive agreements may deter top candidates, while inadequate protection exposes companies to competitive harm and IP loss.
Effective approaches tailor restrictions to employee roles and access, comply with evolving legal standards, combine contractual protections with operational safeguards, and enforce agreements consistently and reasonably.
Contact Rock LAW PLLC for Employment Agreement Counsel
At Rock LAW PLLC, we help AI companies develop employment agreements protecting innovations while remaining enforceable.
We assist with:
- Employment agreement template development
- Non-compete and non-solicitation provisions
- IP assignment and confidentiality clauses
- State-specific compliance
- Enforcement litigation and strategy
- Policy updates for regulatory changes
Contact us to develop employment agreements protecting your AI innovations and competitive advantages.
Related Articles:
- Structuring Founder IP Assignments
- Protecting AI Model Weights as Trade Secrets
- Trade Secret Protections for AI Companies
Rock LAW PLLC
Business Focused. Intellectual Property Driven.
www.rock.law/