Receiver - OneNDA Provision: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a | {{confianat|1(a)}}The [[legal person]] by whom a [[confidentiality obligation]] is owed, to be (but often not) sharply contrasted with its mortal earthly representatives, being its directors, officers, agents, employees and [[professional advisers]] for whom, should [[confidential information]] pass into their hands, it is contractually responsible. | ||
{{confi mutuality}} | {{confi mutuality}} | ||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
*{{confiprov|Discloser}} | |||
*[[Negotiation hacks]] | *[[Negotiation hacks]] |
Latest revision as of 17:00, 2 September 2021
NDA Anatomy™
|
The legal person by whom a confidentiality obligation is owed, to be (but often not) sharply contrasted with its mortal earthly representatives, being its directors, officers, agents, employees and professional advisers for whom, should confidential information pass into their hands, it is contractually responsible.
A confidentiality arrangement is notionally an asymmetrical one, which will prompt fears in the brow of the diligent legal eagle confronted with such a tract — should she be acting for a receiving party, at any rate — that it is therefore somehow one-sided, rigged in favour of the disclosing party. A neat negotiation hack to dissuade this kind of thinking is to make the confidentiality agreement mutual even when, in point of actual fact, the parties only really anticipate the flow of confidential information going one way. It is a small and patently fatuous thing, but it does seem to work.