- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 55,598
This will surprise you all. The person attacking people's mothers and calling name is none other than......
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yeah, i think im pulling my patron support and see myself out. This AMD nutthugging and "hurr im a victim please donate to my forums" has gone beyond normal levels. This place has become what a tech site would be if run by Alex Jones and Nvidia was a company that wasn't run by a member of the Aryan Nation.
Sad to witness the decline of a once great and respected tech reviewer.
You should probably see yourself out. As for the Aryan Nation comment, the oldest employee of HardOCP and one of my most trusted friends is black, and the person that admins our forums is Phillipino. Good try with you race baiting. I have not run an Aryan Nation personally, but I would have to think I am doing it wrong.Yeah, i think im pulling my patron support and see myself out. This AMD nutthugging and "hurr im a victim please donate to my forums" has gone beyond normal levels. This place has become what a tech site would be if run by Alex Jones and Nvidia was a company that wasn't run by a member of the Aryan Nation.
Sad to witness the decline of a once great and respected tech reviewer.
What kind of "nutt juice?" I do like almond butter. Tell me more.50Cal said:Kyle has become a pathetic joke, gargling AMD's nutt juice. I'm out and taking my patron dollars with me
..with that gold award for the Titan V.This AMD nutthugging
I think it is worse than that. What if NVidia declares the inner working of the review driver to be a trade secret?
Now the reviewer reverse engineers the driver and discovers that there is some benchmark cheating function. But due to trade secret status, not even the 5 year rule applies. They are barred from talking about it indefinitely.
But any relevant additional information provided by Nvidia in Kyle's followup with them, or, worse yet, prior information that would prove essential to the new finding of GPP, would be subject to the NDA. Lets say that one has info that takes a whole new meaning after something like GPP leaks, they wouldn't be able to do a service to us because they would have an all encompasing long term gag order placed upon them.
You're missing the point.
Confidential Information that is not public e.g. reviews under embargo, GPUs sent for review prior to launch, tech specs, info etc, are bound by terms of that NDA to be 'for the benefit of Nvidia'.
It doesn't say reviews, it doesn't say anything, it is a non-product aka 'you must use CI for benefit of Nvidia' NDA. So yes, it covers reviews that are under embargo until they are public information.
Kyle had sources leak CI to him, that's how this game often works. He is not NDA bound to that info.
I'm not saying you are an nvidia shill, just that you are misunderstanding the legal implications of this document. Kyles' IP lawyer (which is exactly the right legal field for this) has a very different take on it to Steves' attorney. My experience with NDAs and legal processes also lead me to understand this document in a similar way to what Kyles' lawyer feels.
Compare that to someone whose client is bound by the very NDA we are discussing and gave a horrifically vague answer to the 'benefit' clause.
Funny how things get misunderstood when you start rolling out insults and talking about "nutt juice."you missed my point. Basically Alex Jones would call anyone that isn't right of an Aryan Nation member would be the anti-christ ultra hardcore liberal and then spew all sorts of conspiracy theories about said company. That wasn't race baiting, that was your lack of understand/reading comprehension or more of the "oh im the victim here"
If he had any prior information provided by them that would be relevant to the whole debacle, he still couldn't use it to inform the public.Only if they deem it confidential. If Kyle breaks another GPP type story by his own investigative journalism and Nvidia wanted to do damage control or debunk GPP, it wouldn't make sense for them to give Kyle a statement then label it confidential. I don't think that would work in this situation.
Well, at least one industry veteran thinks it is quite more and there hasn't been any claim by anyone that would disprove that, only to what degree this different NDA is an issue or not.I do believe Nvidia is trying to control the information sites are putting out about them but not really anymore than any other company.
So if NVIDIA were to pull me aside one day, and talk to me about GPP confidentially, that means I could never discuss it. Right? And I have had MANY conversations with NVIDIA that were about confidential information.The "Confidential Information" explicitly says it has to be given to you by Nvidia "Made available to the recipient sometimes from the disclosing party." If you are not given the information, then you have no restrictions on doing the research and reporting it.
Exactly. Why would you sign anything if you were a journalist.I see nothing \ here that prevents reporting of GPP, since you did not sign that.
Only if they deem it confidential. If Kyle breaks another GPP type story by his own investigative journalism and Nvidia wanted to do damage control or debunk GPP, it wouldn't make sense for them to give Kyle a statement then label it confidential. I don't think that would work in this situation.
Reviews before release date have always been restricted. Reviews after release aren't confidential because.../snip.
So as I understand it, anything you can find out on your own, as in GPU test results, are not subject to the NDA.
I do believe Nvidia is trying to control the information sites are putting out about them but not really anymore than any other company. I understand a company wanting to control what sites can do with the confidential and sensitive information if gives out.
I totally believe Nvidia would try to control all review results if they could get away with it.
That's just insane....they are trying to keep their hype train from derailing when their GPUs start missing the performance marks they claim.
This is some grimy stuff. Who puts a 10 year NDS out.....I think basically its saying that We don't want anyone who spoke out badly of someone to ever get the chance to speak out again.....this is what kills journalistic integrity.
Make you wonder how much of this type of stuff happens behind closed doors with the New Media outlets....looks like those smaller outfits get snuffed out along with suppressing the truth.
OK, I was pissed off initially about this too but the more I read it, the more I don't think it's that bad.
No they're not. It actually doesn't say anything about reviews. It says any information disclosed by Nvidia to a reviewer is deemed confidential. Nvidia sending [H] a 1180 FE to review isn't confidential information but specific architecture design secrets sent in an email could be. Any information Brent puts together himself from a review would be fair game and not bound by the NDA because it was information obtained by HardOCP and not based on information disclosed by Nvidia. Information in reviews can't be confidential because any Tom Dick or Harry could find out that information just by buying one. I'm definitely no lawyer but I don't see where the NDA stipulates all reviews have to be good.
The "for the benefit of" line, to me sounds like it's only related to information disclosed to a site by Nvidia and that you can't use it against them. Say Nvidia fucked up the design of the 1180 and it runs too hot and slower than the 1080 so they're remaking them (I know that's a ridiculous example but just go with it). Nvidia emails Kyle and tells him about it but says it's confidential. Kyle can't run out and post a front page article about 1180's slower than 1080's. Basically, anything Nvidia tells you in confidence you can't use to smear Nvidia.
As for GPP, Kyle didn't break that story based off confidential information disclosed to him by Nvidia. He broke it by good old fashioned journalism and doing some digging on his own so he still could've reported it because the NDA only states "confidential information disclosed by Nvidia" is bound by the NDA.
I'm on record here for nearly a decade as a devout AMD fanboy and [H] family member so I'm not playing favorites here and while I will never be confused for a lawyer I can't find any language in this NDA where it looks like Nvidia is trying to force reviewers to only make positive reviews.
I don't get it. Nvidia has a great market position and great products. Why oh why are they trying so desperately hard to repeatedly shotgun themselves in the face?
Who puts out 10+ year NDA's? The UN and governments. I have signed a few over the years,with both. Still,this NDA has been looked over by a real lawyer via GamersNexus with no real ill will found on NVIDIA's part by the lawyer.
Ah, interestingly, sometimes you hear things from employees that they actually want you to tell the public and is CI. I know. Amazing, right? Any source of information from inside the company now becomes NDA.How is this any different from any of their current restrictions on reporting confidential information on new architectures provided in a press packet? If they didn't have you by the balls already, then we'd have all specifications for cards released early.
This just puts these restriction s in writing, instead of just threats of no more invites or review samples.
And the real lawyer did not have a clue regarding the industry this pertained.
Fuck that. I'm grabbing an 1180 Ti next year to replace my 1080 Ti. It's just video cards people. So much white knighting and emotion for a stupid luxury good.
Listen. If you want your journalists signing blanket NDAs, go for it. I would never sign that and open myself up to the vast wealth of lawsuits it could invite for publishing things I know to be true, but are CI. Anyone signing that is painting themselves into a box. Baseless lawsuits are still lawsuits that have to be defended in court. I spent nearly a quarter million dollars defending against Infinium Labs' baseless lawsuit. No way in hell I would ever want to give NVIDIA one inch better ground on going after me in a court of law. And let's face it, that is exactly what that NDA is for.I get that. Nvidia gets wind you're looking into GPP so they tell you all about it but "confidentially" and now your're bound by the NDA. But you broke the GPP story based entirely on your own sources and information dug up during your own investigation, right? Wouldn't you still be ok to run the story? You're allowed to use information that you found out on your own. You just couldn't use anything that Nvidia told you.
Again, I suck at legaleeze so I'm not trying to argue. Im legit asking questions.
I get that. Nvidia gets wind you're looking into GPP so they tell you all about it but "confidentially" and now your're bound by the NDA. But you broke the GPP story based entirely on your own sources and information dug up during your own investigation, right? Wouldn't you still be ok to run the story? You're allowed to use information that you found out on your own. You just couldn't use anything that Nvidia told you.
Again, I suck at legaleeze so I'm not trying to argue. Im legit asking questions.
You work for AMD, lol? So thats the basis for your reasoning? That because AMD is a suffering, financially weak company whose employees may be out of jobs is the main reason to base your HW purchases on? Ok, gotcha. Sorry to be the one to break the news, but thousands of companies around the world are going bust for not being able to perform well or due to competition being ahead of them, thats the nature of things in business. Aside from that, where is the "SERIOUSLY DUBIOUSLY legal crap" that you are referring to? The NDA which is what this topic is about? Please be specific as the actual clauses or sections of the document that "SERIOUSLY DUBIOUSLY legal crap" refers to within it.Just for the sake of argument, if you or your family members are employed in a TV manufacturer, and my TV company does some SERIOUSLY DUBIOUSLY legal crap and hurts that company and so now you or your family members are retrenched, unemployed and lose your house, will you still recommend my TV brand to people looking for a new TV? Would you buy one of my TVs when you next need a TV?
I'm not asking you to reply, I'm asking you to think.
Certain industries have certain practises the NDA can differ from one to another. If he seen only the ones regarding other subjects does that tell you anything instead that whole case was around wording nothing specific towards Nvidia NDA or previous Nvidia NDA.GN's legal correspondent? Can you clarify how he didn't have a clue?
He admitted as much. Doesn't know the industry in question. Also, had no definitive answer on the scope and implications of specific sections, just his feelings on the matter.GN's legal correspondent? Can you clarify how he didn't have a clue?
I read every NDA I sign, carefully. This NDA is simply a tool being used by NVIDIA to, if nothing else, scare journalists into being worried about what they are saying about NVIDIA. That said, no journalist worth his salt would ever sign this document. Also, how many "industry analysts" got this NDA?I hear ya. It's not so much chapter and verse of the NDA that's the problem, it's the potential financial and time consuming black whole of legal battles and bullshit you may have to deal with every time you publish and article Nvidia might not like. I hadn't thought of that.
Certain industries have certain practises the NDA can differ from one to another. If he seen only the ones regarding other subjects does that tell you anything instead that whole case was around wording nothing specific towards Nvidia NDA or previous Nvidia NDA.
He did not even show concern that the duration was for 5 years. He just said just don't sign it if you have problems with this...
you missed my point. Basically Alex Jones would call anyone that isn't right of an Aryan Nation member would be the anti-christ ultra hardcore liberal and then spew all sorts of conspiracy theories about said company. That wasn't race baiting, that was your lack of understand/reading comprehension or more of the "oh im the victim here"
We must have watched a different video. GN's legal guy surprised me with his correct use of industry technical jargon, specs, and the fact that he called out "Turing" seemed very unusual for someone who is unfamiliar with the industry.
I liken it to, "I'm not a real Doctor, but I play one on TV"... He could have been a family court lawyer with computer knowledge. It's a video that doesn't cut it for me.I hate to do this... but if I have a call on youtube with someone I introduce as my lawyer. Do we all instantly accept that this "lawyer" is the most qualified person to discuss. Not saying he isn't but I get a chuckle thinking about the what if.
Yea, you kinda missed my point. We aren't talking about governments and secrets. We are talking companies and corporations and their products. Very different circumstances. Sometimes, depending on your job in the government, you could be under a lifetime NDA depending on your security clearance. That has nothing to do with this topic.Who puts out 10+ year NDA's? The UN and governments. I have signed a few over the years,with both. Still,this NDA has been looked over by a real lawyer via GamersNexus with no real ill will found on NVIDIA's part by the lawyer.
I spent every penny of savings over that and about lost my house as well. You can grandstand on your Youtube channel about signing that NDA, but until you have gone to the mat about writing words on a webpage, you simply do not know what you are giving up when you sign that NDA. And the Infinium Labs CEO just went to prison for ANOTHER pump and dump scheme.To be honest I was surprised you financially survived that fight with Infinium labs.
I hate to do this... but if I have a call on youtube with someone I introduce as my lawyer. Do we all instantly accept that this "lawyer" is the most qualified person to discuss. Not saying he isn't but I get a chuckle thinking about the what if.
But if he signed it, he just did bend that knee.Probably not the most qualified person, but miles better than the armchair lawyers we have who are still stuck speculating on the "FBO" term. Combine the lawyer with the fact that Steve's historically been a straight shooter; he's demonstrated that he'll burn bridges with vendors/brands over something as simple as honesty. E.g. CoolerMaster stopped sampling them after GN's H500P review, so they've been sourcing the hardware themselves. Patreon and merchandizing divest their revenue streams and allow them to tarnish vendor relations with their scathing feedback. They were also among the first to call-out Nvidia's bullshit for the hardware differences between GTX 1060 3GB vs 6GB SKUs, the silent downgrade of the GT 1030, and the new GTX 1050 3GB SKU. Basically, they're among the last of the tech press I'd expect to ever bend-a-knee to Nvidia.
Boilerplate NDA but never seen this one before. Got it.I disagree, they stated while it is unusual to get a blanket NDA granted they've only ever received one-off NDA's from Nvidia in the past, this NDA was relatively boiler plate to them.
Many of the points he discusses are pretty clear cut and straight-forward and make general sense. To blanket dismiss it because you can not ascertain the lawyers credentials sounds more influenced by bias than proper reason. If anything is suspect in what he says, trust me, alternate legal views by 'real lawyers' will quickly spring out to rebut it. Info like this quickly gets around and there are a LOT of lawyers on the internet. If this lawyer is misleading or wrong, he will quickly be challenged. Not holding my breath.I liken it to, "I'm not a real Doctor, but I play one on TV"... He could have been a family court lawyer with computer knowledge. It's a video that doesn't cut it for me.