On 2/29/16 7:00 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > A few days ago, Oliver Keyes said[1] here on this list that, even though he > had already quit his job, he was scared to share with people the content of > the non-disclosure agreement he had to sign as a WMF staff member. > > Do you believe the various non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement > clauses that staff have to sign to work at the WMF should be public? Will > you encourage staff to share their content, in the interests of > transparency?
I don't know, as I haven't seen those. If there is a standard boilerplate non-disclosure agrement that all staff sign (normal practice) then I don't see any reason why that shouldn't be made public. I also don't see much reason *for* it to be made public, if it's just the usual sort of thing. I don't see that it matters much either way, to be frank. In some cases, employees will be bound by specific nondisclosure agreements with partner organizations that bind the Foundation. I would not say that publishing the details of those makes sense. Let me give a purely hypothetical example for the sake of clarity. Suppose we negotiate with a vendor to buy some hardware and manage to get a great discount because the vendor loves Wikipedia. The vendor might say, hey, look, I can only give this discount to Wikipedia, and it would hurt my competitive position in the marketplace if the price I'm giving you were well known. So they'll say, hey, I can give you this discount, but only under a nondisclosure agreement. I wouldn't support publishing that nondisclosure agreement. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
