Legal Foundation of Silicon Valley: Lessons for Asian Hi-Tech Districts

  • Received : 2014.03.11
  • Accepted : 2014.03.31
  • Published : 2014.05.01


Policy planners in Asia readily covet high technology districts and regional systems of innovation such as Silicon Valley. We examine the law's role, by way of covenants not to compete (競業禁止條項) in the development of Silicon Valley by reviewing the literature from 1999 through 2013. The research suggests that in certain high-tech districts such as Silicon Valley, there are greater gains in the innovation of a region by prohibiting CNCs. While we emphasize CNC law as the main legal determinant to Silicon Valley's success, the application of trade secret law and the inevitable disclosure doctrine are also factors that can aid or restrict the mobility and knowledge spillover of a region. Even with much explored, perspectives are lacking from a regional innovation systems analysis, and more so in the context of Asian nations. To tackle these gaps, three analytical frameworks are presented that entails labor law, law and economics, and law and innovation. And from within the law and innovation framework, research is introduced in the hope that future discussions on Asian regional innovation systems consider the legal foundation of Silicon Valley.


Supported by : Hannam University


  1. Bar-Gill, O. and Parchomovsky G. (2009) Law and the Boundaries of Technology-Intensive Firms University of Pennsylvania Law review, 1649-1689.
  2. Bishara, N. (2006) Balancing innovation from employee mobility with legal protection for human capital investment: 50 states, public policy and covenants not to compete in a knowledge economy, Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law, 27 (287).
  3. Bishara, N. (2010) Fifty ways to leave your employer: relative enforcement of covenants not to compete, trends, and implications for employee mobility policy, University of Pennsylvania Journal of Law, 13, 751.
  4. Bishara, N. (2012) Using the resource-based theory to determine covenants not to compete legtimacy, Indiana Law Journal, 87.
  5. Cooke P., Uranga G. and Etxebarria G. (1997) Regional innovation systems: institutional and organizational dimensions, Research Policy, 26, 475-491.
  6. Conti, R. (2013) Do non-competition agreements lead firms to pursue risky R&D projects?, Strategic Management Journal, doi: 10.1002/smj.2155.
  7. Doloreux, D. (2002) What we should know about regional systems of innovation, Technology in Society, 24, 243-263.
  8. Dwight, J. (2002) Covenants not to compete, Akron Law Review, 36, 49.
  9. Estlund, C. (2006) Between rights and contract: arbitration agreements and non-compete covenants as a hybrid form of employment law, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 379-445.
  10. Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, L. (2000) The dynamics of innovation: from national systems and "Type 2" to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations, Research Policy, 29(2), 313-330.
  11. Fagerberg, J., Mowery D. and Nelson, R. (2005) The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, New York, Oxford University Press.
  12. Fallick B., Fleischmann C. and Rebitzer J. (2005) Job hopping in silicon valley: some evidence concerning the micro-foundations of a high technology cluster, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(3), 472-481.
  13. Fleming, L. and Marx M. (2006) Managing ceativity in small worlds, California Management Review, 48(4), 6.
  14. Florida R. and Kenney M. (1986) Venture capital, high technology and regional development, Regional Studies, 22(1), 33-48.
  15. Franco A. and Filson D. (2006) Spin-outs: knowledge diffusion through employee mobility, RAND Journal of Economics, 37(4), 841-860.
  16. Franco A. and Filson D. (2000) Knowledge Diffusion through Employee Mobility, Research Department Staff Report 272, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  17. Franco A. and Mitchell M. (2008) Covenants not to compete, labor mobility, and industry dynamics, Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 17(3), 581-606.
  18. Freeman, C. (1987) Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan, London: Frances Printer Publishers.
  19. Garmaise, M. (2009) Ties that truly bind: noncompetition agreements, executive compensation, and firm investment, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 27(2), 376-425, doi: 10.1093/jleo/ewp033.
  20. Garrison, M. and Wedny, J. (2008) The evolving law of employee noncompete agreements: recent trends and an alternative policy approach, American Business Law Journal, 45(1), 107-186.
  21. Gillian, L. (2001) Restrictive covenants, employee training, and the limits of transaction-cost analysis, Indiana Law Journal, 76(1), 49-76.
  22. Gilson, R. (1999) Legal infrastructure of high technology industrial districts: Silicon Valley, Route 128, and covenants not to compete, New York University Law Review, 74(3), 574-629.
  23. Glick M., Bush D. and Hafen J. (2002) The law and economics of post-employment covenants: a unified framework, George Mason Law Review, 11, 357.
  24. Grant, G. (2013) Noncompete clauses: employee mobility, innovation ecosystems, and multinational R&D offshoring, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 28, 1079-1111.
  25. Graves C. and Diboise J. (2006) Do strict trade secret and non-competition laws obstruct innovation?, Entreprenurial Business Law Journal, 1(2), 323-344.
  26. Graves, C. (2011) Analyzing the non-competition covenant as a category of intellectual property regulation, Hastings Science and Technology Law Journal, 3, 69.
  27. Hannah, R. (2010) Post-employment covenants in the United States: legal framework and market behaviors, International Labour Review, 149(1), 108-118.
  28. Hannes, H. (2001) A survey of the legal restrictions on covenants not to compete, Litigation Economics Review, 5(1), 1-10.
  29. Harlan, B. (1960) Employee agreements not to compete, Harvard Law Review, 73(4), 625-693.
  30. Hwang, H. and Choung, J. (2013) Towards an innovation policy in the post catch-up era, Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy, 2(1), 1-19.
  31. Hyde, A. (1998) Silicon valley's high velocity labor market, Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 11(2), 28-37.
  32. Hyde, A. (2003) Working in Silicon Valley: Economic and Legal Analysis of a High Velocity Labor Market, New York: M.E. Sharpe, Inc.
  33. Hyde, A. (2010) Should noncompetes be enforced, Cato Institute, Regulation, 6-11.
  34. Landes W. and Posner R. (2009) The Economic Structure of Intellectual Property Law, Harvard University Press.
  35. Maloney, V. (2011) Employment law - the elusive enforcebility of employment covenants not to compete in Arkansas, UALR Law Review 34, 593.
  36. Malsberger B. (ed.) (2008) Covenants Not to Compete, A State-By-State Survey, 6th Edition, American Bar Association.
  37. Marshall, A. (1890) Principles of Economics, London: Macmillian.
  38. Marx, M., Singh, J. and Fleming, L. (2010) Regional Disadvantage? Non-Compete Agreements and Brain Drain, Working Paper, MIT.
  39. Marx, M., Strumsky, D. and Fleming, L. (2007) Noncompetes and Inventor Mobility: Specialists, Stars, and the Michigan Experiment, Division of Research, Harvard Business School.
  40. Marx, M., Strumsky, D. and Fleming, L. (2009) Mobility, skills, and the Michigan non-compete experiment, Management Science, 55(6), 875-889, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1080.0985.
  41. Marx, M. (2011) The firm strikes back non-compete agreements and the mobility of technical professionals, American Sociological Review, 76(5), 695-712.
  42. Miller, C. (2010) Google Grows, and Works to Retain Nimble Minds, New York Times, November 28th.
  43. Moffat, V. (2010) Making non-competes unenforceable, Arizona Law Review, 54, 940-984.
  44. Moffat, V. (2010) The wrong tool for the job: the IP problem with non-competition agreements, William and Mary Law Review,
  45. Nelson, R. and Sidney, W. (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Havard University Press.
  46. Nicandri, A. (2011) The growing disfavor of non-compete agreements in the new economy and alternative approaches for protecting employers' proprietary information and trade secrets, University of Pennsylvania Journal of Law, 13, 1003.
  47. Nicola, M. (2009) A note on noncompetes, bargaining and training by firms, Economics Letters, 102(3), 198-200.
  48. On, A. and Orly, L. (2010) Innovation Motivation: Behavioral Effects of Post-Employment Restrictions, San Dieago Legal Studies Paper, 10-32.
  49. On A. and Lobel, O. (2013) Driving performance: a growth theory of noncompete law, Stanford Technology Law Review,16(3), 883.
  50. Packer, C. and Cleary, J. (2006) Rediscovering the public interest: an analysis of the common law governing post-employment non-compete contracts for media employees, Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal, 24, 1073.
  51. Pagnattaro, M. (2007) The Google challenge: enforcement of noncompete and trade secret agreements for employees working in China, American Business Law Journal, 44(4), 603-637.
  52. Png, I. (2011) Law and Innovation: Evidence from the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Working Paper.
  53. Png,I. (2012) Trade Secrets, Non-Competes, and Inventor Mobility, Law and Economics Seminar Stanford Law School, Working Paper.
  54. Png, I. and Samila, S. (2013) Trade Secrets Law and Engineer Scientist Mobility: Evidence from "Inevitable Disclosure", Working Paper.
  55. Porter,M. (1998) Clusters and the New Economics of Competition, Harvard Business Review.
  56. Posner, E., Triantis, A. and Trianis, G. (2004) Investing in Human Capital: The Efficiency of Covenants Not to Compete, The John M. Olin Program in Law and Economics Working Paper Series.
  57. Royker, E. (2011) Another Parallel with Silicon Valley: Non-Compete Clauses under Israeli Law, Unpublished Work.
  58. Rubin, R. and Shedd, P. (1981) Human capital and covenants not to compete, Journal of Legal Studies, 10-93.
  59. Salzberger E. (ed.) (2012) Law and Economics of Innovation, Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.
  60. Samila, S. and Sorenson, O. (2011) Noncompete covenants: incentives to innovate or impediments to growth, Management Science, 57(3), 425-438, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1100.1280.
  61. Saxenian, A. (1996) Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128, Havard University Press.
  62. Schulman, E. (1992) Economic analysis of employee noncompetition agreements, Denver University Law Review, 69-97.
  63. Schwab, S. and Randall, T. (2006) An empirical analysis of CEO employment contracts: What do top executives bargain for?, Washington & Lee Law Review, 63(231).
  64. Still, K. (2013) Drafting effective noncompete clauses and other restrictive covenants: considerations across the United States, Florida Coastal Law Review, 14, 365.
  65. Stuart, T. and Sorenson, O. (2003) The geography of opportunity: spatial heterogeneity in founding rates and the performance of biotechnology firms, Research Policy, 32, 229-253.
  66. Stuart, T. and Sorenson, O. (2008) Liqudity events and the geographic distribution of entreprenurial activity, Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 175-201.
  67. Timberman, A. (2013) A comparison of entreprenurism and internationalization between Asian world-class universities, Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy, 2(2), 173-193.
  68. Toronjo, P. (2011) Preserving human capital: using the noncompete agreements to achieve competitive advantage, The Journal of Business, Entreprenurship & the Law, 4(2), 320-337.
  69. Trossen, D. (2009) Edwards and covenants not to compete in California leave well enough alone, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 24, 539.
  70. Wardwel, S. (2009) Invalidity of covenants not to compete in California affects employers nationwide, Shidler Journal of Law, Commerce, and Technology, 5, 22-24.
  71. Whitmore, P. (1990) Statistical analysis of noncompetition clauses in employment contracts, Journal of Corporation Law, 15, 483.
  72. Wood, J. (2000) A comparison of the enforceability of covenants not to compete and recent economic histories of four high technology regions, Virginia Journal of Law and Technology, 5, 14-15.

Cited by

  1. Comparing the ICT industries of Silicon Valley and Route 128: What has law got to do with it? vol.4, pp.1, 2015,