It is quite common for contractual agreements to include clauses that stipulate that an employee or contractor cannot work for or contract with a competitor (or other entity in the designated field) for X period of time following the breaking of a contract or the conclusion of the contract period.
Fox would have def. had this in place: it prevents the contractee (i.e. Tucker) from working on [FOX] to highlight his fame, reach, etc, and then getting poached by or skipping over to a [competitor].
If Tucker is being paid by Twitter, it means he's being contracted by them, and that could very easily violate such a standard clause.
I'm thinking that he's NOT getting paid by Twitter, currently. But that's just my speculation.
It is quite common for contractual agreements to include clauses that stipulate that an employee or contractor cannot work for or contract with a competitor (or other entity in the designated field) for X period of time following the breaking of a contract or the conclusion of the contract period.
Fox would have def. had this in place: it prevents the contractee (i.e. Tucker) from working on [FOX] to highlight his fame, reach, etc, and then getting poached by or skipping over to a [competitor].
If Tucker is being paid by Twitter, it means he's being contracted by them, and that could very easily violate such a standard clause.
I'm thinking that he's NOT getting paid by Twitter, currently. But that's just my speculation.
I concur ! Lol I brolieve u r correct !