82,891
edits
Confidentiality agreement: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
===What’s in a [[confi]]?=== | ===What’s in a [[confi]]?=== | ||
Confis can be “one way”, where one party discloses and the other receives, or “two way”, where both parties disclose sensitive information. A broker’s template will tend to be far more generous when it is receiving only, than when it is giving information up. | Confis can be “one way”, where one party discloses and the other receives, or “two way”, where both parties disclose sensitive information. A broker’s template will tend to be far more generous when it is receiving only, than when it is giving information up. | ||
====Length==== | |||
Firstly, let’s be blunt about this: there is a special place in hell for [[Mediocre lawyer|any advisor]] who serves up a confidentiality agreement more than 3 pages long. Even three pages is purgatorially tedious. GET TO THE POINT. It’s a goddamn [[confi]], not the sale of your soul. Oh hang on. | |||
===='''Purpose'''==== | ===='''Purpose'''==== | ||
''Why'' are the parties sharing the information in the first place? Typically, you’ll want to restrict use of the information to matters relevant to the project. Expect to see a definition of “purpose”, or something similar. | ''Why'' are the parties sharing the information in the first place? Typically, you’ll want to restrict use of the information to matters relevant to the project. Expect to see a definition of “purpose”, or something similar. | ||
| Line 25: | Line 26: | ||
===='''Return of information'''==== | ===='''Return of information'''==== | ||
The disclosing party will want rights to get the information back at the end of the project. In this modern era of distributed network computing, the old entreaties to “return all copies of information” are faintly absurd: as if they’ve been kept in a manila folder in a filing cabinet somewhere, only inspected by chaperoned employees wearing white cotton gloves. Of course everything will have been transmitted electronically, will exist on servers all around the world, and the very action of attempting to return it will oblige it to be copied onto other servers. Some of these copies will be stored for years under document retention policies. So the real ask ought to be “to put beyond practical use” and have an exception for regulatory retention. There’s also a conceptual issue with information the receiving party has derived from the confidential information — this may include information which is confidential to the receiver, and should not have to be offered up to the discloser. | The disclosing party will want rights to get the information back at the end of the project. In this modern era of distributed network computing, the old entreaties to “return all copies of information” are faintly absurd: as if they’ve been kept in a manila folder in a filing cabinet somewhere, only inspected by chaperoned employees wearing white cotton gloves. Of course everything will have been transmitted electronically, will exist on servers all around the world, and the very action of attempting to return it will oblige it to be copied onto other servers. Some of these copies will be stored for years under document retention policies. So the real ask ought to be “to put beyond practical use” and have an exception for regulatory retention. There’s also a conceptual issue with information the receiving party has derived from the confidential information — this may include information which is confidential to the receiver, and should not have to be offered up to the discloser. | ||
===Special AKA=== | ===Special AKA=== | ||