Thanks for a moment of clarity in all this madness Roy :) david
> > Sam, I've gotten rather disappointed with your tactics of late. I > > choose to take part in the ASF and its decision making processes. I > > choose not to have information that would limit my financial viability > > via making me party to a Non Disclosure Agreement. > > > > I'd like to avoid a situations such as say someone posts some NDA'd > > spec for a VM as part of some JSR you're working on and I then go and > > start working on Mono and Sun takes my house for "disclosing".. > > (possibly without me even reading it) > > That isn't possible. Even if you were to read "secret" information, you > cannot be sued for making use of public information once it has become > public, nor can you be sued for making use of your secret knowledge > to create something that is not derived from the presentation of that > information from Sun, presuming that you can demonstrate it wasn't > derived from the secret (which would be easy for Mono). > > What you can be sued for is taking information that is distributed under > NDA and making it public, even if you are not a party in the NDA. As > long > as you know that Sun considers it to be a trade secret and has not > published it themselves, you cannot publish that information regardless > of > how it was obtained. Signing, or not signing, the NDA is irrelevant. > > Even if you never see the secret information, and have no ties to anyone > who has access to it, you can be sued. The company simply needs a > reason > to believe that someone under NDA (including its own employees) might > have given you the information. However, they can only sue you for > damages caused to them by you making that information public prior > to others making it public. They cannot sue you for what you know, > and they cannot claim damages if you keep it secret. > > The purpose of the NDA is to establish a contract between those who > give us the information to those who receive it, such that we all agree > that it is secret and will treat it as such until the originator makes > the information public. > > > I think an open JCP list where no NDA material is permitted would be > > entirely appropriate. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] is more than sufficient for that purpose. There is > nothing > about the JCP that is public other than what you see on jcp.org and > what the spec leads offer for public review. > > In any case, the notion that you would somehow lose economic viability > from being on the JCP list is just plain backwards. A consultant with > inside information is far more valuable than one on the outside. I'll > accept a claim that you simply don't what to partake in a closed > process, > which is indeed why we created the jcp list (so members who refuse to > participate in the closed process can choose to do so). However, you > should not go asking those who do participate about the facts that are > readily available to those on the list. You need to read the public > output instead. > > ....Roy > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
