Apple vs Adobe Hiring War: The Steve Jobs Email That Exposed Silicon Valley’s Dirty Secret

‘One of us must change’: Apple–Adobe's hiring war; Steve Jobs writes angry email

Long before cancel culture or viral LinkedIn rants, Silicon Valley’s fiercest battles played out in private emails. One of the most revealing—and explosive—was sent in 2005 by none other than Steve Jobs, Apple’s legendary co-founder, to Adobe CEO Bruce Chizen.

The subject? Alleged employee poaching.

The tone? Unapologetically blunt.

The fallout? A behind-the-scenes agreement that would later become a symbol of the tech industry’s controversial “no-poach” culture—a practice that, years later, sparked federal investigations and class-action lawsuits. This Steve Jobs email wasn’t just a moment of corporate friction; it was a window into how the world’s most innovative companies quietly colluded to control talent mobility.

Table of Contents

The Steve Jobs Email That Started It All

In early 2005, Apple noticed that Adobe had been aggressively recruiting some of its senior engineers—individuals deeply embedded in core projects like macOS and early iPhone development.

Jobs, fiercely protective of Apple’s talent and culture, didn’t call HR. He didn’t schedule a meeting. He fired off an email to Chizen that, according to reports, read like a cold ultimatum:

“I’m not willing to let you recruit our employees… I’m sure you understand. If you don’t, one of us must change.”

Chizen, rather than back down, proposed a compromise: let’s allow senior-level hires but avoid targeting mid-tier or junior staff. But Jobs wasn’t interested in half-measures. His stance was absolute: no poaching, at any level.

The two eventually struck a quiet understanding: both companies would refrain from actively soliciting each other’s employees. No formal contract—just a gentlemen’s agreement rooted in mutual interest.

What Was the Apple–Adobe Hiring War Really About?

On the surface, this looked like typical corporate rivalry. But the context made it explosive.

At the time, Apple was in the early, secretive stages of developing the iPhone—a project so sensitive that even within Apple, access was tightly controlled. Losing skilled engineers to Adobe, a company deeply involved in creative software (Photoshop, Flash, etc.), wasn’t just inconvenient—it was a strategic threat.

Meanwhile, Adobe was pushing hard into digital media and mobile, positioning itself as a key player in the emerging smartphone ecosystem. Its investment in Flash for mobile browsers, in particular, would later become a point of public contention with Jobs.

So this Apple Adobe hiring war wasn’t just about people—it was about controlling the future of computing.

The No-Poach Agreement Explained

The Jobs–Chizen exchange was part of a broader, unspoken norm among Silicon Valley elite: a no-poach agreement.

Between 2005 and 2009, Apple, Google, Intel, Pixar, and others—including Adobe—maintained informal pacts not to cold-call or actively recruit each other’s employees. The goal? Retain top talent without wage inflation or internal disruption.

But here’s the problem: such agreements violate U.S. antitrust laws. They suppress employee mobility, limit salary growth, and reduce market competition for talent—essentially colluding to keep labor costs artificially low.

According to a 2010 Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation, these pacts were so widespread that then-Apple HR chief Deirdre O’Brien once emailed Google’s Eric Schmidt: “Please don’t cold-call our engineers.” Schmidt reportedly replied, “I understand. We’ll stop.”

The DOJ filed a civil antitrust complaint in 2010, forcing Apple, Google, Adobe, Intel, and others to formally end their no-poach practices .

But that wasn’t the end.

In 2013, over 60,000 tech employees filed a class-action lawsuit, arguing they’d lost out on higher salaries and better opportunities due to these secret agreements. The case settled in 2015 for $415 million—a fraction of what plaintiffs sought, but a historic acknowledgment of wrongdoing.

This episode reshaped hiring ethics in tech. Today, companies are far more cautious about verbal or written “gentlemen’s agreements.” Yet, informal talent truces still exist—just more discreetly.

What This Means for Today’s Tech Talent

For job seekers, the lesson is clear: your value isn’t just in your skills—it’s in your freedom to move.

Modern platforms like LinkedIn, AngelList, and even Twitter have democratized recruitment, making secret no-poach deals harder to enforce. Still, be wary of non-solicitation clauses in offer letters or internal policies that subtly discourage switching between “rival” firms.

And for employers? Transparency wins. Companies like Microsoft and Salesforce now publicly champion “talent mobility” as part of their employer brand—knowing that restricting movement harms innovation in the long run.

For more on ethical hiring practices, check out our deep dive on [INTERNAL_LINK:ethical-tech-recruitment].

Conclusion: The Legacy of a Private Email

That Steve Jobs email to Bruce Chizen might have seemed like a minor corporate spat in 2005. But it became a cornerstone in one of Silicon Valley’s biggest ethical scandals. It reminds us that even in an industry that champions disruption, old-school collusion can lurk beneath the surface—and that true innovation requires not just great products, but fair treatment of the people who build them.

Sources

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top