From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
|
|
| (25 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{a|design|
| | #redirect[[OneNDA Anatomy]] |
| | |
| [[File:Club.png|450px|frameless|center|Why did it take the legal community two thousand years to come up with this idea?]] | |
| }}Don’t just read about it here: go see: https://www.onenda.org
| |
| | |
| [[Legal eagle]]s ''love'' the idea that standard, [[boilerplate]], tedious terms that make up the lion’s share of commercial legal discourse should be regarded as a common utility; a free public resource, and not some [[secret sauce]] that keeps battalions of [[legal eagle]]s in well-paid but soul-destroying work. Everyone — not just lawyers, come to think of it — likes to believe herself special, privy to something critical; dangerous; ''delicate'' — information that, should it fall into the wrong hands, may wreak great ill upon its owner or the poor unsuspecting random.
| |
| | |
| Kudos, therefore, to the team at the [http://www.lawboutique.co.uk Law Boutique] for doing something about it. The [[JC]] will put his sclerotic old shoulder to the wheel, for whatever that is worth and commends his friends, relations and readers; especially those who occupy places in the firmament higher than his own — that’s more or less all of you — to do what you can to get your own organisations behind this excellent initiative. Start with the NDA, who knows where it may lead?
| |
| | |
| Of course, the effluxion of time, the inevitable [[special pleading]], the [[committee]] drafting to which we agents of the tragic commons resort by irrepressible force of habit may mean this augers into the ground, but we can but try.
| |
| | |
| {{sa}}
| |
| *[[Confidentiality agreement]]
| |
| *[[ClauseHub: theory]]
| |
| *[[ClauseHub]]
| |
| *[[Secret sauce]]
| |
Latest revision as of 15:06, 30 May 2024