Subject:
|
Re: Non-Disclosure question
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego.direct
|
Date:
|
Thu, 3 May 2001 21:39:39 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
345 times
|
| |
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message
news:GCs23G.9uJ@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.lego.direct, Dave Schuler writes:
> > I understand that certain fortunate individuals among us are privy to
> > information that they've agreed not to divulge, and that's cool. However,
> > once the info becomes public knowledge, will you folks be able to discuss
> > what you had been told in the first place? That is, if the information is
> > (or isn't, for that matter) consistent with what you'd initially heard, are
> > you allowed to point this out?
>
> I am not a lawyer.
>
> And I would love to hear the definitive info but I think the answer is no.
> That is, disclosing what you knew or when you knew it or whether it was
> correctly predictive is itself a violation of a typical NDA. But I could be
> wrong and I would defer to a statement by LD on how they construe their NDA.
On the agreement I signed (and I talked this over with someone at LD, recently
even), the agreement terminates one year from the date signed. This means,
legally, we can disclose what we were told. That doesn't mean we will - some
things we might withhold out of courtesy to LEGO - and depending on other
factors there might be things that are appropriate or inappropriate to disclose.
I don't intend on disclosing information after the NDA is up that LEGO prefers I
not disclose. If others who were under NDA want to, that's their business.
Robin Smith would be able to best answer the question, her being a (one of two,
I believe) Corporate Counsel for the Americas, she probably knows the NDA inside
out and backwards and perhaps even drafted it herself.
-Tim
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Non-Disclosure question
|
| (...) disclose. (...) I (...) two, (...) inside (...) It sounds like you asked, but the expiration on an NDA may not be the point at which you can reveal the information, but the point at which you need to sign a new NDA before sharing any further (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Non-Disclosure question
|
| (...) I am not a lawyer. And I would love to hear the definitive info but I think the answer is no. That is, disclosing what you knew or when you knew it or whether it was correctly predictive is itself a violation of a typical NDA. But I could be (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
4 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
|
|
|
|
