Executives are not normal employees
They are not paid like normal employees, the normal rules do not apply to them as they do to normal employees, so please do not pretend like they're just average employees.
Please note that I'm not fan of this, nor advocating this as the proper way of things. Just stating how things work.
Exhibit A: Any normal employee with improper expense reporting equivalent to Hurd's would be civilly sued if not pursued criminally for theft.
Exhibit B: A Cxx at one of my smaller clients was pink slipped, sued, and won his "bonus" for the year in question. His bonus was almost as much as I make in a year.
If Hurd didn't want to abide by the noncompete clause he should not have accepted the severence. HP can indeed have it both ways because of that 8-figure severence package they handed him. His kids aren't starving, he's not going ut on the street because he can't pay the mortgage.
If there's a valid question here it's if the noncompete covers his new position at Oracle - I don't think it's a stretch to claim that. This will probably wind up with an agreement stipulating what areas in Oracle Hurd is allowed to work with.
When HP hired the CEO-in-training from EMC a similar case was filed, he wasn't allowed to work with storage. I believe there was a similar spat between Google and Microsoft over a search exec a few years back. This is nothing new when dealing with execs.
I'm no fan of how HP (and Hurd) treats their average employees, but please do not throw this guy into the same conversation. Like it or not, execs are different.