AMD NDA Scandal

crazyeyes writes "Just two weeks ago, a Thai journalist walked out of the hush-hush AMD event in Singapore over a controversial NDA that required him to 'send any stories to the vendor before his newspaper can publish it.' AMD categorically denied it happened, but today, we not only have proof that it happened, we also have the sordid details of the entire affair. Here's a quote from the editorial: 'First off, the non-disclosure agreement covered everything confidential said or written over the next two years on the product, and had a duration of five years, during which anything published or used in marketing would have to receive written approval from AMD before it could be used. Worse, at the end of the five years, all copies of the information made would have to be returned to the chipmaker.'"

Comments

Seems to be a non-issue...

[Reemi]

unfortunately, there is not verbatim copy of the NDA, only a section that seems to paraphrase.

It is not unusual to have a NDA covering a longer period so one does not have to sign it each and every occasion. Then, even according to the text such a NDA is only applicable for confidential information. That means, everything posted in the Bankok Post would not be confidential anymore ;-)

How much control can AMD have over the articles to be published? Not much probably as long as no confidential information is there. But we'd need to see the original text.

Btw, why not link to the article of the journalist involved:
http://www.bangkokpost.com/Database/05Sep2007_data 006.php

Re:another example

[djmurdoch]

He refused to sign, AMD relented, and then on Day 2 of the visit he was asked again to sign, and refused. That's what TFA says.

Conclusion?

AMD sucks, the reporter is a hero, and you can't read (or spell).

That's the NDA process for you

[Helmholtz Coil]

Having gone through the NDA process a few times, it's been my experience that it's really a negotiation and rarely a "take it or leave it" affair-they wouldn't be talking NDA if they didn't want to talk to you in the first place, so there's usually some flexibility.

What seems to happen is one or both sides offer an initial NDA that's insane (I think just to see what they can get away with, really); then the idea is to try and negotiate towards a sane(r) middle ground. So without knowing any details, the newspaper could have countered with a suggested NDA of their own, and walked away from the table if AMD wouldn't bend. No story for the paper in this case, but AMD also doesn't get the publicity it needs. If it happens enough with other media organizations, AMD ends up having to be a little more flexible if they want any coverage at all.

Re:Wrong Scandal

[Angostura]

When I was a tech journalist, by standard procedure was to read the NDAs and cross out the most egregious clauses, sign it and return. If I was feeling particularly charitable, I would point out the parts that I had deleted. Their an agreement. You are within your rights to amend before signing.

Re:Wrong Scandal

[PCM2]

Excuse me? If I went on any "5-star, all-expense paid trip to Singapore" at a vendor's expense I'm going to be--and I would deserve to be--fired in less time than it took me to write this note.

Hear, hear. I've worked for a couple of different publications in the trade press and we were generally only allowed to accept gifts from vendors totaling in the realm of about $20. Attending an industry meet-n-greet held at a fancy restaurant was often enough to set fingers wagging.

Re:If the journalist was stupid enough to sign it.

[NMerriam]

If the journalist was stupid enough to sign it.

I know lots of folks don't read the stories, but you could at least try to make it NINE WORDS into the summary before responding! The FIRST SENTENCE of the post was not exactly an SAT-level reading comprehension test.

Read the corrected/updated story

[postbigbang]

see http://www.bangkokpost.com/Database/05Sep2007_data 006.php

Then note how much non-news this really is. A bunch of local yokels got a bit enamored with themselves.

Nothing to see here. Move along and smear somone else.

Re:If the journalist was stupid enough to sign it.

[Gorshkov]

Did you even read the fucking summary? The journalist refused the NDA. The journalist reported that AMD uses abusive NDAs. AMD denies the journalist's claim. Proof of the claim is found.

Did you even read the fscking story? The NDA said any materials used in marketing had to be cleared first. There is absolutly NOTHING in there about attempting to censor news stories, opinion pieces, or anything else.

How the bloody hell is a story about a company wanting to control the marketing of it's own products news?

Re:If the journalist was stupid enough to sign it.

[Danse]

Did you even read the fscking story? The NDA said any materials used in marketing had to be cleared first. There is absolutly NOTHING in there about attempting to censor news stories, opinion pieces, or anything else. Are you illiterate or what? This is a quote from the story (emphasis mine):

First off, the non-disclosure agreement covered everything confidential said or written over the next two years on the product, and had a duration of five years, during which anything published or used in marketing would have to receive written approval from AMD before it could be used. Worse, at the end of the five years, all copies of the information made would have to be returned to the chipmaker. Notice the difference between that and what you said? So the journalist would have to get approval from AMD before he publishes any story about anything that AMD considers confidential. What that covers is unclear, but could easily be construed to mean anything at all about the factory tour, and AMD is the one that makes the determination.