Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the news is that the new judicial interpretation by the Supreme People's Court regulates non-compete agreements to prevent abuse and protect workers' rights, particularly for those who do not have access to confidential information [1][4][5] - Non-compete agreements are valid only for employees who have access to the company's trade secrets, and if an employee does not have such access, the agreement is not enforceable [2][7] - The interpretation specifies that the scope, region, and duration of non-compete clauses must align with the trade secrets known to the employee, and any excessive terms will be deemed invalid [9] Group 2 - The judicial interpretation clarifies the criteria for recognizing "continuous signing of two fixed-term labor contracts," ensuring that employees can request an indefinite-term contract after two consecutive fixed-term contracts [10][12] - It addresses the issue of subcontracting and mixed employment, establishing that both the contractor and the subcontractor are responsible for labor rights, thereby protecting workers from being denied their rights due to shifting responsibilities [13][16] - The interpretation emphasizes the importance of retaining evidence of employment and payment to support workers' claims in case of disputes, highlighting the need for documentation such as work IDs and payment records [20]