Like the recent Vioxx scandal. That was all protected under NDA. There were concerns that Vioxx might increase heart attacks but the initial research was statistically inconclusive and so the results were buried. For several years.
In this case, the object of the contract is still lawful (there wasn't CONCLUSIVE evidence) but a corporate leak at this point might've saved hundreds of lives.
Or how about Windows virus announcements? You could have a security issue that Microsoft wants to keep buried. But it's only a theoretical issue not seen in the wild and Microsoft's going to patch it in the next service pack release... Is it a violation of NDA to leak that info?
Like someone else on here posted. How do you know you have a protected violation of the NDA until after you've violated the NDA and other people have decided that for you? (and maybe not in your favor)
I'm making a distinction between an actual trade secret (Coke's recipe, Colonel Sanders 11 secret herbs and spices) and company gossip (Microsoft is working on a new version of Office and a new version of Windows...ooooh hot news!)
Somewhere in there is the quasi legal stuff... (The new Pentiums have a math flaw... Vioxx may increase heart attacks...)
I think a better allegory is if someone tells me that my neighbor is going to build an radio antenna tower on his property for his HAM hobby. Do I have the right to publish that in the housing newsletter?
Slandered, abused, harassed or libeled Apple I'd agree with you.
If ThinkSecret published the formula for Coke or specifics about Apple's OSX internals and other trade secrets I'd agree with you.
ThinkSecret published a rumor about Apple's up and coming product lines.
If they'd even reprinted restricted company marketing sheets given to select individuals I'd agree with you, but they published HEARSAY which isn't even admissible as witness testimony (IANAL) in a criminal case!
I think ThinkSecret should have the right to publish corporate gossip and THAT'S Free Speech. If Apple's got a corporate leak that's THEIR problem and there's a myriad of ways to figure it out without infringing upon a basic liberty. (And I support Apple trying to hunt down their leaks too...)
It's not about revealing your sources... It's about freedom of speech. If a journalist has the right to source secrecy, so does the individual in the act of self-publishing.
If an individual can't protect his sources, then a source isn't going to come forward with information.
If a source violates an NDA, that's Apple's problem. Not the one relaying the information to the public.
"Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg refused to extend to the Web sites a protection that shields journalists from revealing the names of unidentified sources or turning over unpublished material." http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/110 49112.htm
... or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.
IANAL, but I'd interpret that to mean that you can't restrict the press on freedom of speech moreso than the individual... not granting the press *more* rights than the individual...
given to "journalists" (and there is a sort of inferred right because the court just decided that bloggers don't have the same "rights"), then such a right should be granted to all individuals performing a "journaling" function.
Ah, so it's okay then for the government to assassinate individuals who leak what happens in Abu Gharib? Because someone violated an ordered of secrecy and Dan Rather paid them to do it?
An OS backed by a quasi-political philosophy that gains popularity would invariably spin off a counter philosophy. (Yin and Yang)
The question is whether or not this is the usual suspects (Microsoft) or some counter grassroots organization (Beos, BSD).
So long as it stays on the up and up, a little competition and criticism is a good thing. (IE The complaints of FireFox not responding quickly to recent security problems. That's a valid concern)
VS.NET 2005 has implemented all sorts of bells and whistles for "collaborative" development which hasn't been getting much traction in the beta tests and this is just a respin of that to try to make it "sex-ay".
C'mon, when the marketspeak says: "In answering this question, Satchell makes it clear that, while XNA Studio runs on Windows for development purposes, there's no reason why any exported data shouldn't be used anywhere, much as Visual Studio data can be compiled for many purposes. However, Microsoft has built or is building more tools closer to the run-time end of the business to give XNA Studio users significant ease in building content for Microsoft platforms, because exported XNA Studio data can be specifically designed to work with these tools."
That's standard Microspeak for "Yeah,.NET can run on any platform just like COM could."
While this isn't a bad thing, the reality is that it would be FASTER to develop on a platform where the API's were open and the tools put out open and WELL DOCUMENTED file formats that anyone could make tools in the tool chain for.
Not necessarily. A properly implemented mouse interface could work just as well. It wouldn't be the SAME as having a joystick, but it would be a matter of using the mouse to its full potential instead of "point and click".
(IE, using the keyboard for direction and mouse for thrust in that direction.)
Man, what'd they use to call it when Microsoft did it to their competitors... There was an actual term associated with it when they'd drive up to their competition in Limo's and try to hire away their best staff for million dollar salaries... (like they did to Borland)
And I end with a quote from Oliver of Bloom County: "Hackers don't handle obsolescence well."
That's true of the other areas Microsoft has moved into. MS' own product offerings are never spectacularly great compared to the competition. MS' forte has always been commoditizing a very expensive piece of software. There are generally "good enough" for 80% of the populace that they feel no need for buying the better featured and generally more expensive one. Even less so if it comes as part of the OS or bundled (MS Works) with the computer.
Slashdot Mirror
I was afraid I had a problem with my gaming...
You wanna know who the REAL internet addicts are? People at work posting on slashdot... using Google... etc, etc.. I bet they match the "criteria"
It's good to touch?
Like the recent Vioxx scandal. That was all protected under NDA. There were concerns that Vioxx might increase heart attacks but the initial research was statistically inconclusive and so the results were buried. For several years.
In this case, the object of the contract is still lawful (there wasn't CONCLUSIVE evidence) but a corporate leak at this point might've saved hundreds of lives.
Or how about Windows virus announcements? You could have a security issue that Microsoft wants to keep buried. But it's only a theoretical issue not seen in the wild and Microsoft's going to patch it in the next service pack release... Is it a violation of NDA to leak that info?
Like someone else on here posted. How do you know you have a protected violation of the NDA until after you've violated the NDA and other people have decided that for you? (and maybe not in your favor)
(or they should be anyway)
I'm making a distinction between an actual trade secret (Coke's recipe, Colonel Sanders 11 secret herbs and spices) and company gossip (Microsoft is working on a new version of Office and a new version of Windows...ooooh hot news!)
Somewhere in there is the quasi legal stuff... (The new Pentiums have a math flaw... Vioxx may increase heart attacks...)
I think a better allegory is if someone tells me that my neighbor is going to build an radio antenna tower on his property for his HAM hobby. Do I have the right to publish that in the housing newsletter?
Slandered, abused, harassed or libeled Apple I'd agree with you.
If ThinkSecret published the formula for Coke or specifics about Apple's OSX internals and other trade secrets I'd agree with you.
ThinkSecret published a rumor about Apple's up and coming product lines.
If they'd even reprinted restricted company marketing sheets given to select individuals I'd agree with you, but they published HEARSAY which isn't even admissible as witness testimony (IANAL) in a criminal case!
I think ThinkSecret should have the right to publish corporate gossip and THAT'S Free Speech. If Apple's got a corporate leak that's THEIR problem and there's a myriad of ways to figure it out without infringing upon a basic liberty.
(And I support Apple trying to hunt down their leaks too...)
It's not about revealing your sources... It's about freedom of speech. If a journalist has the right to source secrecy, so does the individual in the act of self-publishing.
If an individual can't protect his sources, then a source isn't going to come forward with information.
If a source violates an NDA, that's Apple's problem. Not the one relaying the information to the public.
"Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg refused to extend to the Web sites a protection that shields journalists from revealing the names of unidentified sources or turning over unpublished material."0 49112.htm
http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/11
Whatever happened to the movie producer who was putting screeners out to the pirates for a cut of the takes?
Did he not get the public perp walk like this guy did?
that neither A nor B applies to bloggers. Thus restricting free speech to a benighted few... my original point...
Not just the press. But Apple (and other corporations) can control the press through $$$ but not the individual... so they want the distinction.
(That's my interpretation. I realize others will argue differently.)
... or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.
IANAL, but I'd interpret that to mean that you can't restrict the press on freedom of speech moreso than the individual... not granting the press *more* rights than the individual...
given to "journalists" (and there is a sort of inferred right because the court just decided that bloggers don't have the same "rights"), then such a right should be granted to all individuals performing a "journaling" function.
Ah, so it's okay then for the government to assassinate individuals who leak what happens in Abu Gharib? Because someone violated an ordered of secrecy and Dan Rather paid them to do it?
Freedom of speech protections apply to ALL individuals. Not just a selected profession.
(Now individuals getting into a high government press conference... that's different...)
An OS backed by a quasi-political philosophy that gains popularity would invariably spin off a counter philosophy. (Yin and Yang)
The question is whether or not this is the usual suspects (Microsoft) or some counter grassroots organization (Beos, BSD).
So long as it stays on the up and up, a little competition and criticism is a good thing. (IE The complaints of FireFox not responding quickly to recent security problems. That's a valid concern)
VS .NET 2005 has implemented all sorts of bells and whistles for "collaborative" development which hasn't been getting much traction in the beta tests and this is just a respin of that to try to make it "sex-ay".
.NET can run on any platform just like COM could."
C'mon, when the marketspeak says:
"In answering this question, Satchell makes it clear that, while XNA Studio runs on Windows for development purposes, there's no reason why any exported data shouldn't be used anywhere, much as Visual Studio data can be compiled for many purposes. However, Microsoft has built or is building more tools closer to the run-time end of the business to give XNA Studio users significant ease in building content for Microsoft platforms, because exported XNA Studio data can be specifically designed to work with these tools."
That's standard Microspeak for "Yeah,
While this isn't a bad thing, the reality is that it would be FASTER to develop on a platform where the API's were open and the tools put out open and WELL DOCUMENTED file formats that anyone could make tools in the tool chain for.
"This *is* a space program isn't it? I mean, when you have a manned space program there will be times when people go into SPACE, right?"
"I hate that man..."
Not necessarily. A properly implemented mouse interface could work just as well. It wouldn't be the SAME as having a joystick, but it would be a matter of using the mouse to its full potential instead of "point and click".
(IE, using the keyboard for direction and mouse for thrust in that direction.)
Buck Fill...
Man, what'd they use to call it when Microsoft did it to their competitors... There was an actual term associated with it when they'd drive up to their competition in Limo's and try to hire away their best staff for million dollar salaries... (like they did to Borland)
And I end with a quote from Oliver of Bloom County:
"Hackers don't handle obsolescence well."
That's true of the other areas Microsoft has moved into. MS' own product offerings are never spectacularly great compared to the competition. MS' forte has always been commoditizing a very expensive piece of software. There are generally "good enough" for 80% of the populace that they feel no need for buying the better featured and generally more expensive one. Even less so if it comes as part of the OS or bundled (MS Works) with the computer.
Now that Microsoft is getting into the anti-virus biz and presumably shipping it with the OS, Symantec knows its days are numbered.
It was supposed to be out this month. Now it'll be out in June.
Definitely June... Definitely June 21st... June the 21st... yeah... Time for Wapner... Yeah... People's Court...
Which is great news for those of us who have XBox 1's...
Then we'll see a game ad reminiscient of Apple's 1984 ad with a girl running up and throwing a new game system's joystick through the screen...
for the XBox as Rare has!
Although Conker should be out just in time before the XBox 2 gets released...