Kemp@dockmaster.arpa (03/14/89)
I completely agree that people who get information from Sun under terms of
non-disclosure have an obligation to keep their mouths shut.
But:
If you are hungry for information on new products, check out the Feb 27
issue of EE times, which has:
1) An article on the new <$10,000 12 MIPS machine which the article
says will be introduced in six weeks.
2) An article on Richard M. Stallman (and a picture of him seated
at his 3/60).
3) A two page Solbourne ad with a beautiful picture (presumably of
Longmont, CO) and precious little else.
btw, we have never actually signed a non-disclosure agreement with Sun, we
just sign an attendance sheet for the briefings. I welcome the
informality and feel no less obligated to respect their confidentiality.
Dave Kempmarti@uunet.uu.net (Robert Marti) (04/05/89)
In article <890302023213.283417@DOCKMASTER.ARPA>, Kemp@dockmaster.arpa writes: > I completely agree that people who get information from Sun under terms of > non-disclosure have an obligation to keep their mouths shut. > [ ... ] > BTW, we have never actually signed a non-disclosure agreement with Sun, we > just sign an attendance sheet for the briefings. > Dave Kemp Well, let me add my $0.02's worth: I also agree that people who get information under terms of non-disclosure should keep their mouths shut. HOWEVER, I always get the impression that vendors usually don't mind at all if you pass on the information revealed under non-disclosure. By having you sign an agreement, they are basically just covering their asses in case they don't/can't ship as planned so that no customer or competitor can sue them on the basis of whatever information was revealed. -- Robert Marti Phone: +41 1 256 52 36 Institut fur Informationssysteme ETH-Zentrum CSNET/ARPA: marti%inf.ethz.ch@relay.cs.net CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland UUCP: ...uunet!mcvax!ethz!marti
mash@decwrl.dec.com (John Mashey) (04/24/89)
mcvax!ethz!marti@uunet.uu.net (Robert Marti) writes: >Well, let me add my $0.02's worth: >I also agree that people who get information under terms of non-disclosure >should keep their mouths shut. HOWEVER, I always get the impression that >vendors usually don't mind at all if you pass on the information revealed >under non-disclosure. By having you sign an agreement, they are basically >just covering their asses in case they don't/can't ship as planned so that >no customer or competitor can sue them on the basis of whatever >information was revealed. No. Maybe there are such vendors, and maybe some vendors protect trivial information with nondisclosures, but people who ask for nondisclosures are usually pretty serious about it. I don't know which vendors "usually don't mind...". There are certainly different levels of concern, depending on how far away the product is, and how much damage will be done by having the information available. Competitors are hardly likely to sue; they're much more likely to be delighted if such information is floating around. In a business that moves as fast as this does, a few months' warning is sometimes like gold. I don't care if there are vendors out there who don't mind; most vendors mind a whole bunch; at the very least, if they catch you violating nondisclosure, you'll never get advance information again (if you're an end user, this may not matter much, but there are plenty of places in this business where you must get timely advanced information under nondisclosure to stay competitive); this business is surprisingly well-connected, and you'd be astonished how fast word spreads if you become viewed as untrustworthy; at worst, somebody will sue you, and if they can prove it, you won't be happy. Anyway, please don't take nondisclosure lightly. -- -john mashey DISCLAIMER: <generic disclaimer, I speak for me only, etc> UUCP: {ames,decwrl,prls,pyramid}!mips!mash OR mash@mips.com DDD: 408-991-0253 or 408-720-1700, x253 USPS: MIPS Computer Systems, 930 E. Arques, Sunnyvale, CA 94086
montanaro@sprite.crd.ge.com (04/24/89)
mcvax!ethz!marti@uunet.uu.net (Robert Marti) writes:
...By having you sign an agreement, they are basically
just covering their asses in case they don't/can't ship as planned so that
no customer or competitor can sue them on the basis of whatever
information was revealed.
Whoa, there!
Sun and most other companies have much to lose by early release of
proprietary information. In a highly competitive environment, changes in
release dates by just a couple of months or weeks can translate into large
gains or losses of lots of market leverage.
If a product is being tested under non-disclosure, even the
acknowledgement that the product exists is extremely useful information
for competitors. More damaging can be information regarding performance,
bugs, etc. Alpha and beta test software is often released to priveleged
customers to wring out bugs (especially true for alpha test software).
Great damage to a company's credibility can be done by divulging
information about pre-release software. People reading the information
(possibly taken out of context by a competitor) may infer that the
released product is full of bugs, or performs badly.
If vendors want information leaked in order to put distance between
themselves and the information, they can give it to so-called "market
analysts". If juicy enough, it will wind up on the front page of many
trade rags. If they really don't care about information being transmitted
(or actually want it divulged), they wouldn't have made you sign the
non-disclosure in the first place.
--
Skip Montanaro (montanaro@sprite.crd.ge.com)