On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 22:47:55 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > (for the "fight club" fans)
I was waiting for that... :) > In there terms/conditions of all Macromedia beta tests your not > even allowed to admit you know of the beta or features within the beta > itself. Furthermore you cannot discuss problems, proposed price models, > technology etc of a beta unless its within the BETA forum's) themselves. The NDA says you can't talk about anything that isn't already public knowledge. That means you can say there is a beta program but you can't really say whether you're part of it. You can talk about publicly disclosed features - to the extent that the information is public - but you can't mention details that have not yet been publicly disclosed. > Its pretty clear in that regard, in that you may know what's going on, you > could probably explain the information to your stake holders (as you kind of > take onboard the NDA on behalf of your company) Actually, you need to be very careful about that. The NDA covers individuals not organizations so strictly speaking any individual within your company with whom you might want to share the information needs to actually join the beta and agree to the NDA themselves. > That being said and done, its total crap with Blackstone as there is enough > public information now online that kind of dilutes the whole BETA NDA, as Not from a legal point of view :) > its now effectively public knowledge that for instance Blackstone as > CFDOCUMENT tag. Yet discussion of it is still considered taboo via other > mediums then the forum. It is perfectly OK to talk publicly about the fact that there is a CFDOCUMENT tag that generates PDF and FlashPaper output. That has been publicly disclosed. However, you can't talk about any attributes of that tag, if any, that have not been publicly disclosed. Anything that has been publicly demo'd or publicly disclosed on the Macromedia website or on a Macromedian's blog can be discussed on any public list - up to the level of detail that has been disclosed but not beyond. Example: Ben Forta explained the new application events that Blackstone will likely provide but didn't describe how they will be implemented. You can therefore publicly discuss those events (in as much detail as Ben provided) but you cannot discuss syntax / implementation details because those have not been made public. Example: I've talked about writing a JMS event gateway and gone into quite a bit of detail about the overall mechanics. So everyone can discuss that. But any details about the gateway mechanism that has not been disclosed publicly cannot be discussed. Of course, you're all free to discuss Blackstone as much as you want within the *hush* Blackstone beta forums - since all participants have to agree to the NDA. But Scott's right that it's best to "play it safe". Consider that I have to get explicit permission from the product team to blog about features and to demo features at conferences... -- Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/ Team Fusebox -- http://www.fusebox.org/ Breeze Me! -- http://www.corfield.org/breezeme "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood --- You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
