The answer is pretty simple. Make those clauses unenforceable, as well as non compete clauses. You could do it relatively easily without new regulations and fines and all the bs associated with new anti big tech initiatives.
Overall I don't think it's a winning proposition for the companies involved. So if they want to have an internal rule that forbids them from hiring people, they're just shooting themselves in the foot and will suffer consequences and give up eventually or cheat since it's unenforceable
These weren't contract clauses; they were direct conspiracy between top execs via email.
> One email exchange recounted how Jobs asked Schmidt to stop Google from trying to hire one of Apple's engineers. "I would be very pleased if your recruiting department would stop doing this," Jobs wrote to Schmidt on March 7, 2007.
I'm curious why governments aren't held to this standard of conspiracy the are caught being "very pleased" if private companies did this or that to stifle various freedoms. If JS was honest and a comedian he'd bring something like this up to the FTC rather than give the federal government a nice ego massage.
> I'm curious why governments aren't held to this standard of conspiracy the are caught being "very pleased" if private companies did this or that to stifle various freedoms.
In the situation you're hinting at, social media companies regularly and frequently said "no" to those requests. That does not appear to have been the case in the Google/Apple non-compete conspiracy.
In other words, it's only a conspiracy if both sides conspire.
Overall I don't think it's a winning proposition for the companies involved. So if they want to have an internal rule that forbids them from hiring people, they're just shooting themselves in the foot and will suffer consequences and give up eventually or cheat since it's unenforceable