Doubtlessly, in some business tome to come, it will all be depicted in glorious detail.

And here are three real-life scenes where BoomTown would desperately have loved to be a fly on the wall:

First: The boardroom perusal of the contents of the eight-page letter from former Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) outside contractor Jodie Fisher, sent to former CEO Mark Hurd, which set in motion the circumstances of his ouster–including the odd investigation into that personal relationship that only managed to turn up dicey expense reports.

Second: The welcome-to-the company-and-screw-HP pep talk that Oracle (ORCL) CEO Larry Ellison delivered to Hurd in appointing him co-president and also a director of the database giant.

And third: The furious HP board racing to the door to file a lawsuit against Hurd for the move.

What happens next should be interesting, especially since the idea of settlement has never been one of the tools in Ellison’s wheelhouse, who is doubtlessly egging Hurd on here.

And, after yet another curveball thrown up by Hurd, it is probably not what HP’s board is angling for either.

But perhaps–after all this mishegas–it is precisely what the tech giant should do, focusing instead on finding a new leader to compete with challenges from companies, such as, well…Oracle.

As it was obligated to do, the lawsuit that HP has filed runs through all the typical charges in cases such as this–almost all of which center on the use of confidential information and how Hurd was paid off not to do exactly what he has done.

It certainly is a lot of money–estimated to be about $35 million, depending on HP’s stock price–and hinges on a two-year confidentiality agreement Hurd agreed to.

HP is correctly avoiding any noncompete language, since California–the state where both Oracle and HP are based–shoots holes in those kinds of defenses.

Instead, as it noted in its lawsuit, HP alleges that Hurd “cannot perform his job at Oracle without disclosing or utilizing HP’s trade secrets and confidential information.”

Of course he cannot, but this should not keep HP’s board from settling, as much as it will pain it to do.

Such a move could not have been helped by Ellison’s typically outrageous remarks about how HP treated Hurd, calling the break between them “the worst personnel decision since the idiots on the Apple board fired Steve Jobs many years ago.”

And then yesterday’s statement by Ellison: “By filing this vindictive lawsuit against Oracle and Mark Hurd, the HP board is acting with utter disregard for that partnership, our joint customers, and their own shareholders and employees. The HP Board is making it virtually impossible for Oracle and HP to continue to cooperate and work together in the IT marketplace.”

Of course, that’s just the kind of let’s-go-to-the-mattresses noise that HP needs to ignore, now that the longtime partners are clear rivals after Oracle’s $7.4 billion acquisition of computer maker Sun Microsystems.

This purchase put Oracle directly into the server and data-storage-systems business for the first time.

That’s the real reality for HP–and not the delicious “Real Housewives of Silicon Valley” reality show this has turned into.

And–as much as I would like to see Ellison upending a table onto HP board member Marc Andreessen–no amount of legal and public wrangling with Hurd is going to change that.

If it could not work with him any longer–a corporate psychodrama about which there is still much unsaid–HP needs to move on.

Of course, Hurd should not get off for manipulating the bad situation so deftly either, and perhaps should offer to return some, if not all, of the severance paid for his silence.

Or, it could all just come out in open court and give the world a glimpse into all the twisty machinations that got us here.

Which, as you might imagine, is just fine by me–although not so much for the shareholders of HP.

Lee had a four-year run that began with a bang: Google (GOOG) poached him from Microsoft (MSFT) in 2005, which kicked off a legal battle between the two rivals.

Microsoft accused Lee and Google of violating a noncompete, and Google countersued. Both cases were settled out of court, but not before documents surfaced alleging that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer had once thrown a chair, called Google CEO Eric Schmidt a “pussy” and promised to “f—ing kill Google” while in the presence of another engineer who defected from Microsoft.

Less exciting but more important has been Google’s progress in China since Lee opened up its outpost there. The company was late to China and has been gaining ground, but still lags market leader Baidu (BIDU) there by a wide margin.

Mr. Papermaster’s employment by Apple is a violation of his agreement with IBM against working for a competitor should he leave IBM. We will vigorously pursue this case in court.”

– IBM, October 2008

IBM’s legal efforts to enforce a noncompete agreement that would have prevented 26-year company veteran Mark Papermaster from jumping ship for a high-profile job at Apple appear to have failed. In a terse statement issued this morning, Apple (AAPL) said the litigation between IBM (IBM) and Mark Papermaster has been resolved. Come April 24, Papermaster will begin leading Apple’s iPod and iPhone hardware engineering teams as SVP of Devices Hardware Engineering, reporting to CEO Steve Jobs. He will, however, have to certify in July and October that he has complied with legal obligations and not used confidential IBM information at Apple. From IBM’s own release on the matter:

IBM and Mr. Papermaster have now agreed on a resolution of the lawsuit under which Mr. Papermaster may not begin employment with Apple until April 24, 2009, six months after leaving IBM, and will remain subject thereafter to all of his contractual and other legal duties to IBM, including the obligation not to use or disclose IBM’s confidential information. Following commencement of his employment with Apple, Mr. Papermaster will be required to certify, in July 2009 and again in October 2009, that he has complied with his legal obligations not to use or disclose IBM’s confidential or proprietary information. The preliminary injunction will be replaced by a court order under which the Court will have continuing jurisdiction over this matter, including compliance enforcement powers, until October 24, 2009, one year after Mr. Papermaster’s departure from IBM.”

Mark Papermaster, the IBM veteran poached by Apple last month to become its senior vice president of Devices Hardware Engineering, has filed a countersuit against his former employer in a fast-metastasizing dispute over his noncompete contract.

In documents filed late Thursday in federal court in New York, Papermaster argues his noncompete agreement with IBM (IBM) is “unreasonably broad.”

The ‘Business Enterprise’ restriction is unreasonably broad in that it purports to restrict Mr. Papermaster from going to work for any company that engages in competition with his former business unit to any extent, even if Mr. Papermaster will not be working for the part of the company that does so. Likewise, the ‘significant competitor or major competitor’ prong purports to restrict Mr. Papermaster from going to work for one of these companies even if the work that Mr. Papermaster will be doing is completely unrelated to the work he was doing at IBM. These provisions are not necessary to protect any legitimate interests of IBM.”

So not only is Papermaster’s noncompete “unreasonably broad,” it’s utterly irrelevant to his employment with Apple (AAPL).

And beyond that, it’s just plain silly.

Noncompetition agreements are unenforceable both in Texas, where Papermaster was employed by IBM, and California, where he’ll be working for Apple–a fact also noted in his countersuit. Given that, does IBM really want to be putting up $3 million to cover any damages Papermaster might incur should the case be decided in his favor?

“Mr. Papermaster’s employment by Apple is a violation of his agreement with IBM against working for a competitor should he leave IBM,” said Fred McNeese, director of IBM’s corporate media relations group. “We will vigorously pursue this case in court.”

And for good reason. As a member of the IBM (IBM) elite Integration and Values Team, Papermaster had broad access to the company’s intellectual property, trade secrets, and more. From the complaint:

The I&VT is charged with addressing the most difficult and important issues facing IBM, such as developing corporate strategy and driving innovation and growth and I&VT team members work with the most sensitive strategic information the Company possesses.

In his capacity as a member of the I&VT, Mr. Papermaster has gained access to confidential information concerning the Company’s strategic plans, marketing plans and long-term business opportunities, including the development of specific IBM products.

… Mr. Papermaster is IBM’s top expert in ‘Power’ architecture and technology, and he is privy to a whole host of trade secrets and confidences belonging to IBM that the company uses to design, develop and manufacture its products.”

Sounds like IBM has a lot to lose in Papermaster. Certainly, it’s worrisome that someone with his processor design expertise and deep knowledge of IBM research and innovation could end up at Apple, a company that’s made quite a name for itself recognizing the potential of innovations others have left fallow.

Instead, several sources with knowledge of the situation think Icahn is more likely to choose Edward Meyer and Frank Biondi (pictured here, left to right), both of whom were on the alternative board slate when the activist investor was waging his now-defunct proxy fight against Yahoo (YHOO).

Another possibility is someone BoomTown had previously picked–former Nextel exec John Chapple (pictured here)–as a personal favorite, noting in late July:

Thus, overall, from good-fit perspective, I like another former exec, John Chapple of Nextel best of all because mobile will be increasingly important to Yahoo in Web 3.0 (frankly, it better be, as Web 2.0 has not been too kind to Yahoo).

Via Sprint (S), Chapple knows from big mergers and he knows how to makes deals. He has been the operator of a digital company, unlike many of the others. And he is also an entrepreneur, which is a plus.

Longtime media exec Frank Biondi is a longtime Icahn crony, and Meyer definitely has the advertising chops Yahoo needs, as former Grey Global Group head.

Icahn has already been seated as a board member of Yahoo.

Presumably, Icahn will now begin to try to figure out ways to goose Yahoo’s lackluster stock from the inside, in order to recover the hundreds of millions of dollars in paper losses he has endured since he started his still fruitless quest to change Yahoo’s management and/or get it to sell to Microsoft (MSFT).

One possible scheme was to eventually install Miller as Yahoo CEO.

In any case, both Icahn and Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang strongly supported Miller for the board.

But Miller was unexpectedly nixed because of a noncompete agreement still in place that he had signed with Time Warner after he was tossed from AOL in late 2006.

After tacitly agreeing to waive the noncompete, Time Warner’s CEO Jeff Bewkes told Miller he could not be considered for the slot.

Thus, Yahoo is limited to the list of possible members of Icahn’s director slate.