82,891
edits
Template:Confi term: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Now perhaps the [[JC]] is that long-prophesied seal of the forthcoming [[apocalypse]] (actually that might explain a few things, come to think of it) but, personally, he has never been able to understand what this “term” [[covenant]] could possibly achieve? Why, after a couple of years, should I suddenly be entitled to blare all your darkest secrets out from the minarets around town, without so much as a by-your-leave? | Now perhaps the [[JC]] is that long-prophesied seal of the forthcoming [[apocalypse]] (actually that might explain a few things, come to think of it) but, personally, he has never been able to understand what this “term” [[covenant]] could possibly achieve? Why, after a couple of years, should I suddenly be entitled to blare all your darkest secrets out from the minarets around town, without so much as a by-your-leave? | ||
While the commercial value of much information ''does'' go stale over time (blueprints for a BetaMax, anyone?), this isn’t universally true — a client list is valuable however long you hold it — and the usual justification for the hard stop (“we just | While the commercial value of much information ''does'' go stale over time (blueprints for a BetaMax, anyone?), this isn’t universally true — a client list is valuable however long you hold it — and the usual justification for the hard stop (“we just don’t have the systems to indefinitely hold information subject to confidence and don’t want indeterminate liability for breach”) is a canard — a palpably false one at that, for a regulated financial institution. Whatever information security systems you do have don’t suddenly stop working after three years. And as for [[indeterminate liability]] — well, [[no harm no foul]]: if the information really is stale then no loss follows from a breach, right? No loss, no damages. | ||
In any case, it seems to the [[JC]] that a term creates more questions than it answers. When does it run from? The date of the [[NDA]] itself, or the date of disclosure of the information in question? If the former, and the point is to exclude ''stale'' information, why is the NDA date a relevant point? If the latter, who is monitoring what is disclosed when? What is meant to happen when the term expires? Why are we even having this conversation? | In any case, it seems to the [[JC]] that a term creates more questions than it answers. When does it run from? The date of the [[NDA]] itself, or the date of disclosure of the information in question? If the former, and the point is to exclude ''stale'' information, why is the NDA date a relevant point? If the latter, who is monitoring what is disclosed when? What is meant to happen when the term expires? Why are we even having this conversation? | ||