That usage + slang is the source of the concept what i'm referring to...

Some of this stuff is archaic.

Hunting/Fishing laws in europe were restricted to the nobility for hundreds of years.

And at the same time: "Most European noblewomen were party to chattel marriages" {etc}

Anyways, that's all different than poaching in Africa today, for example (personal vs state "property"), but it's likely the source of the term... so i agree.

I disagree with you both because as the GGP said, companies don't own employees. In the business world I see poaching as hiring a person who you learned about solely through their employment at the company in question.

I tend to think of poaching as a bit broader than that, but not just cold calling someone because you know they work at X.

For example, if someone leaves the company, and then there is a concerted effort to recruit other members of that team or based on their recommendation that is poaching. If you've signed an agreement that forbids this, and you actively take part in it, I think it is wrong; otherwise it is fine.

Alternatively, if you've engaged a companies services and then try and hire away the people doing the work to disintermediate the service providing compnay, that would probably count as poaching in my book too.

I consider both scenarios you described to fall squarely under my definition. Think about it, in both cases you learned about the prospects through their employment at said company.

My reply was to phrasing in the GP comment that has since changed (It talked about poaching being a literary allusion to dating or marriage).

I definitely think some business use of the word poaching is intended to stir up the idea that some sort of trespass has occurred, but language also tends to like such cute usages (regardless of the presence of an underlying agenda).