Subject:
|
Re: NDAs
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego.direct
|
Date:
|
Mon, 12 Feb 2001 17:21:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
576 times
|
| |
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message
news:G8nLoJ.5Iw@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.cad, Charles Eric McCarthy writes:
>
> > Why exactly do the people going to the "Train summit" or "CAD summit"
> > need to sign NDAs and to get inside information? You don't need
> > to sign an NDA to share your ideas with TLC. So I conclude that
> > the desire among the participants to learn inside information is
> > greater than their desire to be able to speak freely. Or maybe
> > they haven't thought of it in those terms yet.
> > (This is a general comment, not directed to any participant in
> > particular.)
>
> I think this is a great question.... it gets to the heart of why companies
> share preannounced info with the general public (or rabid fans, or some
> spectrum of in between). My comments are more about the train summit but I
> suspect Steve or Tim or whoever would echo some of the same thoughts on the
> CAD summit.
First off, good thoughts Larry, and good question, Eric. I'll attempt to add to
the comments as they apply to the CAD summit.
> I'll say this, it's not that we wanted to see inside information as an end
> to itself. There are leak clubs for that. It's not that we wanted to come
> off as privileged (well in my case, maybe a little, I just can't help it...
> sometimes my ego doesn't stay completely under control. But rest assured
> that's not the case with anyone else) because we got to see stuff.
I don't think anyone from the CAD summit went into this meeting with the purpose
or focus being that they get to find out secret information. I know I didn't
realize the extent of what we would find out, and that wasn't my goal in coming.
My goal was to listen to what LEGO had to say to us and give them our feedback
as they asked. We were there for feedback, similar to the Train Summit in some
respects, I feel.
I do count it as a privilege to be included in LEGO's internal affairs. This
weekend meetings and social time was an incredible gift from LEGO to each one of
us. I'm sorry that more from the CAD community could not share in this
experience, but for the sake of the meetings we needed to keep the discussion as
limited and focused as possible to achieve the best results.
> It's that we and LD (at some considerable planning effort over several
> months) assembled a fairly representative slice of Train fans, and LD shared
> stuff with us *in order to get our reaction to it*.
And the same for us at the CAD summit.
> I hope and believe that LD is going to use the feedback in order to refine
> the offerings. Otherwise we wasted our time. Ya, we had a fun fest, and I
> got to tag three names with faces that I hadn't already met, but I could
> have spent my weekend other ways, as could every other participant.
Yup. I came away from this weekend realizing that 90% of the LEGO employees in
attendance were AFOLs just like us. I think that should be a major
encouragement to the community. But as with all large companies, decisions are
made for larger purposes, politics, etc, plus, it takes a long time for them to
develop something and react, etc. Its something that a lot of fanatic fans
don't understand, and something that I didn't understand until I became more
involved with them. After this weekend, I have a general good feeling about
LEGO Direct and their willingness and eagerness to work with us as a fan
community, and the sincerity of the employees there. I am not without reserve
though - this is new territory for all of us.
> I was one of the first people asked (after J2, who Brad has worked with
> before since he was involved in the KidVention GMLTC thing) to the Train
> Summit and I had some input into who else was asked. I did my level best to
> influence the list of people to make it as representative as I could given
> the number of people that could go (the original target was 6, Brad
> graciously expanded it, not once but twice, to get to 9). I'm not perfect,
> J2's not perfect, the rest of us aren't perfect people pickers, you could
> argue that we should have had X or Y or Z but I stand behind the grouping as
> representative of the target.
The same for the CAD group. I was one of the first three people approached, and
from there I worked with Tomas Clark at LEGO to expand the team of LCAD/LDraw
representatives to six people who all had valuable things to say. All of the
people present are important figures to the CAD community in various ways. I'm
regretful I could not include some others who have worked equally hard as we
have to promote LDraw. It was difficult to prioritize and choose who attended
this summit for that reason.
As far as our NDA as applies to the CAD Summit, it was and is absolutely
necessary because of the nature of what we have discussed. A lot of our
discussion is in the very preliminary stages, so LEGO cannot risk letting this
information out to the public. In retrospect we probably should have
reconsidered the manner in which this was let out to the communty, and I have
emailed Tomas about the public angle and hope to start discussion on what will
be said by LEGO soon.
I hope this clarifies a bit (in a vague way) the nature of the CAD Summit, and
the nature of the NDA which was attached to it. I'm sorry if this has caused
anxiety to the community - but I can understand where people are coming from
when they post anxious thoughts.
-Tim
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: NDAs
|
| (...) A gift? Please. LEGO got just as much, if not more, out of having you lot up there. Otherwise, they wouldn't have bothered. I haven't been nosey enough to ask about travel and boarding expenses. It would be a bit shocking to me to find out (...) (23 years ago, 12-Feb-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | NDAs
|
| (...) I think this is a great question.... it gets to the heart of why companies share preannounced info with the general public (or rabid fans, or some spectrum of in between). My comments are more about the train summit but I suspect Steve or Tim (...) (23 years ago, 12-Feb-01, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.general, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
31 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
