UNIT THREE: FOCUS ON ETHICS—CONTRACT LAW & THE APPLICATION OF ETHICS 447
B. UNCONSCIONABILITY
C. EXCULPATORY CLAUSES
Sometimes, the law permits parties to assume by express agreement the risks inherent in certain activities. An
exculpatory clause may be held unconscionable or contrary to public policy and thus void, however, when there is
disparity in bargaining power. For this reason, such clauses in contracts between employers and employees are
almost universally rejected (“freedom from contract”).
II. Covenants Not to Compete
The text indicates that the constantly changing state of technology has led to knowledge learned on the job, including
trade secrets, becoming a more valuable commodity than it once was. This has led to a wider use of covenants not to
compete and more challenges to their legality.
A. JURISDICTIONAL DIFFERENCES IN ENFORCEMENT
In some states, they are not enforceable. In states in which they are enforceable, a covenant cannot be overly
broad, in which case a court might reform it.
B. DO NONCOMPETE CLAUSES STIFLE INNOVATION?
There is a strong public policy favoring competition. According to one observer, the benefit of this policy was
underscored in the 1990s when technological development and economic growth soared in California—where
covenants not to compete are prohibited—but languished in Massachusetts—where the covenants are allowed.
B. CRITICISMS OF THE STATUTE OF FRAUDS
The Statute of Frauds has been criticized because it can be used as a technical defense. This is one of the reasons
that there are exceptions such as the doctrine of promissory estoppel.