From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
|
|
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{confianat|Certification}}What this clause does — well, search me. If you certify falsely that you have destroyed the information when you haven’t, then what? Is that any more egregious breach of the {{t|contract}} than not having destroyed it as directed in the first place? Is the measure of damage different? No. Are you any more able to prove any breach or loss? No.
| | #redirect[[Return of information - NDA Provision]] |
| | |
| But there is a fun organisational time bomb buried in this provision. Your [[negotiator]] has a free option now to create paranoid mayhem among senior people, who should know better, at some unstated point in the future, when she is well clear of the blast zone. This should gladden her heart. The requirement for some warm body in your organisation, at some unstated future date, to certify that secret squirrel information, which as far as anyone knows was sent by email and propagated through inboxes, sent items, [[email canoe]]s and cloud servers in 74 different jurisdictions and could be anywhere, ''has'' been effectively destroyed or put beyond practical use will send normally sober people scuttling for exits, leaping into laundry baskets, planking, and painting the soles of their feet yellow and hiding upside down in custard.
| |
| | |
| “I can’t certify that!” the [[general counsel]] will wail. “How am I supposed to know whrther it’s been fully destroyed? What does “beyond practical use” even mean? [[chicken licken|The sky will fall in on my head]] if I certify this and it hasn’t! Help help we’re all going to die!”
| |
| | |
| For a cynic, this is an edifying sight. It tends to confirm one’s careful, lengthily cultivated prejudices.
| |
Latest revision as of 14:30, 6 June 2024