The Cult of the NDA

Anonymous Coward writes "After looking at hundreds of business plans during the tech boom of the late 1990's, and starting my own company two years ago, I've long been bothered by the near obsession with secrecy shown by many tech startups. This is especially striking considering how few startups are actually pursuing unique ideas. I finally wrote an article about this, The Cult of the NDA, where I argue that too much secrecy can actually hurt a company's chances. Open-source startups, anyone?"

Comments

Open source startups? How about yours?

[Andy Tai]

You can be the first one, you know.

Tow years???

[FosterKanig]

Don't you have any desire to present yourself as intelligent. If you are trying to sell your writings as intelligent, shouldn't you do a little proof reading first.

You got guts, pal

[GuyMannDude]

Many of the most successful technology companies were not the first in their markets, but successful followers which learned from the mistakes of earlier trailblazers.

To take the most obvious example, Microsoft was not the first software company, the first OS vendor, or the first productivity software vendor.

You get the idea. More often, the long-term winners are the companies with the willingness to adopt good ideas from other places, and the flexibility to learn from the mistakes of the pioneers. Making mistakes can be very expensive, and being able to avoid certain mistakes can be a competitive advantage.

So what you're saying is that Microsoft's prominence in the world today has nothing to do with their illegal business practices. Okay, got it. Thanks for setting me straight.

Man, you got a lotta guts coming here and saying that Microsoft is the model we all ought to be following...

GMD

NDAs are flat out immoral.

[Bruce Schnier]

If you prescribe to the beliefs of the FSF and do not believe in intellectual property the only conclusion about the topic of NDAs that you could make is that they are immoral. Information is by its very nature free. Nearly ALL encryption is breakable*, which to me proves that information is inherently free -- all of our manmade attempts to confine information have failed or will at some time fail given adequate time and technology. When a word or idea is expressed it can not be taken back - it belongs to the public. The whole concept of encryption is completely backwards. As an altuistic society we need to look deeper within ourselves and understand that only through cooperation can we succeed as a society. Encryption (and the secrecy of NDAs), though I admit I find it to be a fascinating subject from a purely technical standpoint -- I have read and researched quite a bit on the subject, is just another man made technology which makes the claim to be 'progress' which actually represents a social and spiritual regression. NDAs signify our distrust of others and is yet another thorn in the side of humanity and society which is preventing us from attaining some higher understanding or spiritual enlightenment if you will. *The only case I can think of where encryption would be unbreakable is when some data is encrypted with a one-time-pad and somehow the key has been completely lost from anyones memory.