My old boss told me to never put a non-compete in our contracts, and I'm glad I listened.
When I started my small agency five years ago, my first boss from my old job gave me some hard advice. He said, 'Derek, putting a non-compete on your freelancers is a good way to get sued for no real gain.' I was worried about people taking my clients, so I almost did it anyway. But I listened. Last year, a freelancer I used for a project in Chicago left to start his own thing. He took a client with him, and I was mad. My lawyer told me that if I had a non-compete, I'd have to spend at least $10,000 just to start a fight I'd probably lose, because they're so hard to enforce for independent contractors. It saved me a huge headache and a lot of money. Has anyone else dodged a legal bullet by leaving a clause out of their agreements?
That's a really good point about the legal costs just to start. I mean, ten grand is a lot of money for a small shop to burn on maybe winning. Did your lawyer say if there was anything else you could have put in the contract instead, like a clear rule about who owns the client relationships? Something that protects you without trying to stop someone from working.
That "ten grand to start" point is fair, but it's the cost of doing business sometimes. A well written non compete for a key employee who knows all your trade secrets is cheap insurance. Losing one big client could cost way more than that legal fight.