Doesn't matter. First thing you sign when you join a new employer is an agreement that says something like "I am not under any other company's non-compete".
While this might not be enforceable, if you were a small company in a similar space, would you really risk hiring someone if you might get attacked by Google's lawyers?
The second is an idiot who doesn't know how to negotiate or use Google (to search for the thousands of citations to the precedent). Don't hire the guy.
News flash: big companies will try to screw you, even when it's against the law. If you do not resist, you are a chump, and I feel that hiring passive chumps can only lead to trouble.
Not nice, maybe, but it's worth understanding. When push comes to shove, you have to stand up for yourself.
Those that signed the NCA and then discarded it got themselves a free 2 months of severance. I applaud their canny maneuvering; Google is poorer for firing them.
Hmm, that's a great point I hadn't thought of before.
From an employer's perspective I can clearly see given 2 identical candidates why you might want to shy away from the one who has signed a non-compete with a company known for having alot of lawyers like Google or Microsoft.
While this might not be enforceable, if you were a small company in a similar space, would you really risk hiring someone if you might get attacked by Google's lawyers?