OneNDA: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|design|}}Don’t read about it here: go see: https://www.onenda.org | {{a|design|}}Don’t read about it here: go see: https://www.onenda.org | ||
We love the idea that standard, boilerplate, should be regarded as a utility and not some secret sauce that keeps battalions of [[legal eagle]]s in well-paid but soul destroying work. | We love the idea that standard, [[boilerplate]], tedious terms that make up the loin’s share of commercial legal discourse should be regarded as a common utility; a free societal resource, and not some secret sauce that keeps battalions of [[legal eagle]]s in well-paid but soul destroying work. | ||
Kudos, therefore to the team at the [http://www.lawboutique.co.uk Law Boutique] for doing something about it. The JC will put his shoulder to the wheel, for whatever that is worth, and commends his friends, relations and readers who occupy places in the firmament higher places than his own — that’s more or less all of you — to do what you can to get your organisations behind this excellent initiative. | 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 places 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. | 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}} | {{sa}} | ||
*[[Confidentiality agreement]] | *[[Confidentiality agreement]] | ||
Revision as of 16:54, 17 February 2021
|
The design of organisations and products
|
Don’t read about it here: go see: https://www.onenda.org
We love the idea that standard, boilerplate, tedious terms that make up the loin’s share of commercial legal discourse should be regarded as a common utility; a free societal resource, and not some secret sauce that keeps battalions of legal eagles in well-paid but soul destroying work.
Kudos, therefore, to the team at the 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 places 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.