[1] http://www.cartoonbrew.com/business/pixars-ed-catmull-emerge...
Many people I know in the industry, people who've worked with Catmull directly and were surprised by the no-raid agreements and his emails, these people also see and understand there's more nuance here than pure greed/evil/disgustingness.
Catmull did make statements about trying to protect the overall business at the expense of individual wages, as well as said things that exhibit a belief that wages were too high. "If the pay goes way up in an industry where the margins are practically nonexistent, it will have a negative effect."
And for what it's worth, Pixar is still in business, while both studios I worked for, PDI & Avalanche, have been since shuttered by DreamWorks and Disney, leaving all the employees there without jobs, even while they were making profits. Plus, the VFX industry in the US did in fact collapse almost completely near the end of when this all happened, and it had a lot to do with margins getting too small or going negative, as well as foreign competition and foreign subsidies, so the fears aren't exactly unfounded.
I never starved or felt significantly under-compensated while I was at either company, in fact I was paid pretty well, and I know many people who'd prefer to have kept their job with a little less pay than not have a job, or even change jobs or have to switch industries. They're all doing fine, but not by choice in all cases.
Anyway, it doesn't take being unredeemingly bad to explain what happened, there are less extreme explanations. Catmull clearly believed he wasn't doing something wrong, because he refused to apologize for it. While I'm certain it was illegal, I'm less certain that it was immoral or disgusting or that his motives were 100% selfish, in the larger context. I'm still curious about him, and the wages thing is a black mark, but he did make many important and foundational contributions to computer graphics. He seems to be a genuinely nice and thoughtful person in his interviews and writings. I'm curious what the discrepancy is between what he says and does, and whether his intentions were as bad as they're being painted to be.
In his capacity as a senior leader of a major silicon valley company, he actively worked to limit people's employment opportunities. That tarnishes his record as a great leader.
Pixar is in the East Bay, not the valley!
I am not saying it was the correct thing to do, however, if it is that common in the industry, then it is a systemic defect versus a personal defect and should be treated as such.
Guess he means safe but where they stitch things up with other managers to pay you less.
Reading it makes me feel mildly nauseated.