Taser International, Inc., develops and makes electronic control devices and accessories, including video and audio recording devices. Steve Ward was Taser's vice president of marketing when he began to explore the possibility of developing and marketing devices of his own design, including a clip-on camera. He talked to patent attorneys and a product development company and completed most of a business plan before he resigned from Taser. Ward then formed Vievu LLC to market a clip-on camera. Taser filed a suit in an Arizona state court against Ward, alleging a breach of the duty of loyalty. The court issued a summary judgment in Taser's favor. Ward appealed.

A state intermediate appellate court reversed and remanded. "An agent is under the duty to act with entire good faith and loyalty for the furtherance of the interests of his principal in all matters concerning or affecting the subject of his agency." Under this principle, "an employee is precluded from actively competing with his or her employer during the period of employment." In this case, "substantial design and development efforts by Ward during his employment would constitute direct competition with the business activities of Taser and would violate his duty of loyalty." But summary judgment was inappropriate "because a genuine issue of material fact exists as to the extent of Ward's pre-termination design and development efforts."

Short of resigning his employment based on no more than a desire to work for himself, could Ward have taken any steps towards starting his own firm without breaching his duty of loyalty?