New NVIDIA Press Embargo Stirs Things up

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Jun 26, 2018.

  1. Zooke

    Zooke Member Guru

    Messages:
    186
    Likes Received:
    30
    GPU:
    Titan X SLI @ 1475
    This is not how it reads to me, from the document;
    "Recipient shall not be liable for disclosure of Confidential Information that (a) .... entered the public domain subsequent to the time it was communicated to Recipient by Disclosing Party other than by a breach of this agreement by Recipient."

    Recipient is defined as "identified below". i.e. the person signing the document.

    This does not cover breaches of NDA by other parties. Hence Hilbert can report such breaches and still adhere to the NDA he has signed.

    That's how it reads to me.

    Edit : However, this is all legal nonsense, as I previously said Nvidia will simply blacklist you if you publish stuff they don't like, NDA or no NDA so the wording is irrelevant for all practical purposes.
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2018
    Fox2232 likes this.
  2. Embra

    Embra Master Guru

    Messages:
    916
    Likes Received:
    207
    GPU:
    Vega 64 Nitro+LE
    It's not that this disclosure is much different from others, it's that these NDA exist as they are. What happen to the days of true journalism? Everything is steer in a certain direction now.

    I know I am being idealistic here, but it's sad one the less to me.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2018
    Keitosha likes this.
  3. rm082e

    rm082e Master Guru

    Messages:
    520
    Likes Received:
    124
    GPU:
    GTX 970 SLI
  4. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,755
    Likes Received:
    2,203
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    Then it's time to test it, right? Let's make thread about release date of next nVidia's generation.
    OP places today's date, and every poster there whites: "No, it is on ..." next day. And so on. Then Hilbert can come, and press like on correct date as it was already in public domain.
    While it looks like someone can make speculation article and it enables people under NDA to spill the beans about correct parts, it is definitely not intended to work that way.

    But I agree, that nV will cut people regardless them following this NDA if they see it as beneficial.

    In there, I think main thing is: "Recipient shall use Confidential Information solely for the benefit of NVIDIA..."

    Edit: rereading and I think nV made wording mistake. In that entire "Termination of Obligation of Confidentiality" They state "Information ... In public domain".
    That's very vague. Usually there is clear distinction between known and thought.

    Distinction is:
    Thought: Sourced via speculation, and not technically confirmed. (Including NDA breaches, as there is no way to confirm that person stating that they breached NDA did so.)
    Known: Technically confirmed.
    Information in Public domain: Practically everything there is.

    Therefore this NDA may end up being pretty soft and target only 1st person spilling the beans.
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2018

  5. Noisiv

    Noisiv Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,657
    Likes Received:
    499
    GPU:
    2070 Super
    @Fox2232
    You wanna know about the consensus among ze germans (Computerbase, PCGH, toms)?
    They are more concerned about the way Heisse ppl decided to become martyrs in exchange for clicks, while making everyone else look stupid to an untrained eye, and open to accusation from the usual populist crowd, then they are concerned about NDA itself.

    We have several lawyers claiming this is fairly standard stuff, but this doesn't phase you one bit. No offense Fox, but what is your point?

    If you're gonna get yourself worked up over this, instead of repeating demonstrably unfounded concerns, at the very least read the NDA page to page.
    Which shouldn't be too hard, since unlike some other NDAs and legal documents, this one is barely 2 pages long and pretty much humanly readable.

    Better yet re-read what @Zooke wrote and:
    [​IMG]
     
  6. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,755
    Likes Received:
    2,203
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    Not that I actually cared (since I did read Hilbert's posts) much. I joined at page 5 two days after thread started.
    And point, it is thread as any other. Information here is just bit more asking for being dissected. Opinions are subjects of change as you can see.

    To opinions of German sites/Heisse reasons. Not important to me at all. As they are not here to discuss with. (I'll rather have meaningless discussion here with anyone about anything, than writing opinion on those when I do not think they'll give feedback.)
    To "Humanly readable"... It is legal document, and one word with subtly different meaning can shift entire thing, that's interesting part.
     
  7. Noisiv

    Noisiv Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,657
    Likes Received:
    499
    GPU:
    2070 Super
    To think that someone in a $150B public company would come up with the grand scheme of freely giving Confidential Information, only to sue the recipient later is ludicrous.
    What does nvidia stand to gain by feuding with the press?

    Not that I think that pressuring their partners is above Nvidia, but what exactly is the problem here anyway? Do you want Confidential Information or not?
    If you do, the whole point of Confidential Information is that it's CONFIDENTIAL. OTOH if you prefer to speculate, tweet and whatnot, don't sign and go with Christ :D

    EK has 10 years confidentiality expiration date. What now - evil EK?
     
    alanm likes this.
  8. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,066
    Likes Received:
    675
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    First of all, you're reading way too far into this NDA. Nothing is implied. Everything is spelled out in a very specific manor. If NVidia considers it to be "confidential", it can only be disclosed with consent from NVidia or after 5 years. If it's disclosed to the public by another party, it's free to discuss. If it's considered a "trade secret", it can not be discussed.

    As for the GTX970 debacle. The NDA would not have protected NVidia. Federal courts have already ruled that an NDA can not be used to avoid legal repercussions for wrongdoing. Also, NVidia provided no information regarding the GTX970 debacle up-front and denied the accusations even while settling the class-action suit that was brought against them. Companies like NVidia don't typically settle such suits unless they know they're going to lose big. Fact is, NVidia admitted to knowing that the published specs were incorrect, even while denying such knowledge. They claimed "there was a miscommunication between engineering and marketing"... That statement, proves that NVidia knew for a fact that the published specs were wrong. However, NVidia did not provide such information to the media. Instead, the media learned of the issue on it's own, allowing them to freely publish it. (Which is actually covered, specifically, in the NDA.....)

    IF NVidia were to build a "backdoor" into any of their products, security researchers would eventually find out and it would be all over the tech news sites within hours.

    Seriously, you're reading WAY too much into this NDA. It's not as vague or all encompassing as you think it is.

    To put it in plain English, this NDA basically says: "If you receive information from NVidia corporation that's deemed confidential, NVidia controls the release of such information until such time that it becomes public knowledge or a period of 5 years has passed. If you receive information from NVidia corporation deemed to be a trade secret, NVidia explicitly controls the release of such information. If during the process of testing a product, information that may be deemed confidential is discovered, release of such information is openly permitted unless it was previously disclosed by NVidia corporation, in which case NVidia controls public disclosure."

    For the record, no, I don't have a law degree nor am I a lawyer. I do have a few NDAs that are nearly identical to this one though, except for the corporation names, and they were reviewed by lawyers before I signed them.

    So, had Hilbert discovered the memory issue with the GTX970, he could have and would have freely published said information with prior approval from NVidia, as granted in the NDA.

    Thank god these guys don't get to see the kinds of NDAs that a lot of companies force their employees to sign.... The over-reaction in this thread is quite entertaining to me.

    Still a short NDA for those of us that have to deal with them in the real world. Some companies have employment duration and/or lifetime NDAs...
     
  9. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,066
    Likes Received:
    675
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    And it doesn't work that way. Basically, someone HAS to violate the NDA first. Simply starting a thread in the forum and everyone posting a date, doesn't work. For Hilbert to respond in any way to confirm the date if ever guessed correctly, would violate the NDA. However, if another site were to publish the release date, as provided by NVidia.... That would free up Hilbert to confirm if he chose to. Even under the NDA, he can discuss the pending release dates of products as he sees fit, so long as he doesn't confirm the release date or the existence of a release date prior to NVidia's approval. That would technically violate the NDA but it's up to NVidia to actually enforce the NDA anyway and it's unlikely that they'll take action against a site that generates any kind of meaningful business for them.
     
  10. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,755
    Likes Received:
    2,203
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    @sykozis To your #108 : My post clearly implied situation where nVidia lets media know NDA information before they found out, you imply sequence as did happen.

    To #109 : Your logic can't be any more flawed, nor your look at entities. Presuming that someone random on forum who writes one of those dates (even if correct one) is not under NDA and does not know... Then thinking that correct date published by other site came automatically via NDA. Then this NDA forbids speculations/extrapolations based on NDA information.
    Yes, even while knowing correct release data in this instance one can do generic speculation like: "If it is released before 1st of August..., and if it is released after 1st of August it can mean ..."
    But if nVidia outs NDA info like "GPUs are delayed because we are working on GDDR6 and will be available later this year." Then this covers GDDR6 information person is supposed to be shut about and very wide release date range. Therefore even statement "I do not think it will be released in 2019 is extrapolated information from NDA."

    Not that it did really matter. In #104, I already came to conclusion that wording nVidia used aims this NDA only at 1st person breaching it.
    Question is: "How is 2nd person under NDA supposed to know that 1st person breaching it was not guessing?" That's why I came with release date guessing thread example. Because both real breach and guessed information fully fulfill "Information being in Public Domain".
     

  11. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,066
    Likes Received:
    675
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    It's not my logic.... Even though I'm under several NDAs myself, I largely disagree with them and feel they're abused by companies.

    For someone under NDA to be able to openly discuss information covered by NDA, the information made public must be factual as well as detailed "within reason". Basically, there has to be proof that the information made public, is the same information covered by NDA. Simple guesses, speculations or rumors, don't provide work arounds for an NDA though. Speculation and rumors can be discussed though, so long as not confirmed by someone under NDA.

    If another site posts an article covering information that is subject to the NDA, that information is no longer covered by the NDA because it's now "out in the public". However, guessing at information such as a release date, memory capacity, clock frequencies, core counts, doesn't give the same result because the information itself is merely a guess. Speculation doesn't constitute information being "out in the public" because nobody knows the actual information until confirmed. However, if a site such as Anandtech, TechPowerUp or THG were to run an article concerning information covered by NDA, since they're tech media, the information would be considered "out in the public" and thus open to discussion UNLESS the article expressly states or implies that the covered information is speculation, rumor or a simple guess. Guesses, rumor and speculation don't constitute public disclosure.

    NDA's only apply to the person who signs them and only within the terms stated within the NDA. It's common practice for an NDA to only cover the 1st breach. Once the information is made public, it would be nearly impossible to defend the NDA in court.
     
  12. D3M1G0D

    D3M1G0D Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,968
    Likes Received:
    1,257
    GPU:
    2 x GeForce 1080 Ti
    Oh yes, I think the GPP is the primary catalyst here. Having pulled such a hideous trick, it's obvious that you're going to be put under the microscope for any other contract. From what I've read, this looks like a false flag, but the GPP effect has made people more critical of what they sign (nobody wants to end up like Gigabyte, Asus or MSI - being tarred and feathered for signing the GPP).
     
  13. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,755
    Likes Received:
    2,203
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    @sykozis : I agree with you except that painful entitlement attributed to tech media sites. There is still no way you can say that information in Anandtech's article is sources via breach of NDA or guess. They can make as perfect guess as anyone else without knowing. And then another site which actually received specification details under NDA goes and breaches it as they believe cat is out of the bag already.
    (That's why I am pretty unsure about scope covered by "Information already being in Public Domain". And why I think that any information, even something what may or may not be considered guess, counts.)
     
  14. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,066
    Likes Received:
    675
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    It's a matter of facts..plain and simple. If another site posts an article with facts, sufficient to prove that the information covered by NDA is now made public, that information is no longer covered by NDA.

    However, If the article states that it's just rumors, speculation or a simple guess, they are not claiming the information to be fact and the information is still subject to NDA.

    Why is that so hard for you to understand? It's a pretty damn simple concept.
     
  15. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,755
    Likes Received:
    2,203
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    Because it is stupid assumption. You have no way knowing what source site uses. Or if they tell truth when they state: "speculation/rumor", or "Hey, we breached NDA for you." lol, yeah, happens, ... right.
     

  16. Embra

    Embra Master Guru

    Messages:
    916
    Likes Received:
    207
    GPU:
    Vega 64 Nitro+LE
    So they need to speculate before they receive spec info, etc...

    This whole thing is very gray.
     
  17. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,066
    Likes Received:
    675
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    I hope you don't have such difficulty comprehending such simple things in your every day life....

    To avoid breaching the NDA yourself, you have to prove that the information (within reason) matches the information covered by NDA, regardless of what the damn source is. It doesn't matter if AnandTech, THG runs an article. In fact, it doesn't matter at all what the exact source of the information is. All that matters is whether or not the information posted is the same as the information covered by NDA, factually. It's the easiest damn concept in the world. People on tech sites seem to be the only ones that can't comprehend it.
     
  18. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,755
    Likes Received:
    2,203
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    So, now you turned 180°. Because I argued that if I go and pull perfect numbers from my arse, it counts as information in public domain. And anyone under NDA is free to confirm it.
    You argued that lowly forum monkey are not credible while sites like anand are. (Just because they are tech media.)
     

Share This Page