NVIDIA Looks to Gag Journalists with Multi-Year Blanket NDAs

amenx said:
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.
Click to expand...
Im placing my bets on Nvidias lawyers winning defending their " garden variety, innocent NDA".
And btw, they only have to sue and ruin ONE... then everybody else that's signed this will be shitting bricks while sweating bullets.
 
amenx said:
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.
Click to expand...
I can concede that he is the utmost authority on the subject and spoke nothing but the truth, it still doesn't change the fact that he hadn't refuted any of the issues Kyle raised.
 
Uvaman2 said:
I don't know .. these people think they are preserving their jobs.. I get that, but i think long term they are putting it in more peril, than what would happen to them if they lost nvidias goodies now.
Linus swore they are not even friends with nvidia and have very little access... they seem to have some decent money flowing.. i am sure they didn't sign it right?
Click to expand...


Linus gets a bad rap,but I have to admit,that irl,he can be very much helpful and a gentleman.
 
Meeho said:
I can concede that he is the utmost authority on the subject and spoke nothing but the truth, it still doesn't change the fact that he hadn't refuted any of the issues Kyle raised.
Click to expand...
BUT... he has rebutted a lot of misconstrued views of others on the topic (when Steve read out examples of forum postings typical of the views of some here and elsewhere).
 
Pieter3dnow said:
And the real lawyer did not have a clue regarding the industry this pertained.
Click to expand...


I did not know the lawyer Mr Burke talked to,was not a IP Lawyer. That certainly changes things. Ultimately I trust the opinion and reviews of [H] over a faceless lawyer.
 
SomeoneElse said:
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.
Click to expand...


True,I was more just thinking out loud,based on some limited personal and professional experience.
 
SPARTAN VI said:
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.
Click to expand...
He might even know a bit from a byte sadly that does not mean anything in this matter...
 
You know, i know tech sites and review sites is competitive ground, and probably even harder than ever to make a decent living on it, but they are not powerless either, and they are something Nvidia along with everybody else depend on. I think a lot of the following they may or may not get is more dependent on the quality of their work in videos and articles, than in any same day review or access to secret nvidia corporate sponsored gossip... I mean press releases. I don't know i think these sites are devaluing themselves too much, and basically saying, i am completely worthless , without any access from in this case nvidia... Im worthless and i have no power.. I don't know...yes i realize others would then be first... But is that all it takes for a big site/ tech you tuber to think they are toast? I don't think so... I couldn't do what hardocp does... I pretty sure i would plaster my brains in the wall from the boring, repetitive over and over and over data gathering process.. you know shit you need to do it right.
 
Last edited:
Manny Calavera said:
I did not know the lawyer Mr Burke talked to,was not a IP Lawyer. That certainly changes things. Ultimately I trust the opinion and reviews of [H] over a faceless lawyer.
Click to expand...


No, the lawyer was correct, it was just an observation from the viewpoint of a PURE hardware reviewer, not an investigative journalist.

Pure reviewers don't care about Nvidia employees leaking information to them, which would be against the NDA. But for investigative journalists, the internal sources in Nvidia are often the best sources.

SO THEY ARE BOTH RIGHT. The Nvidia NDA is no big deal for the pure hardware reviewers out there, but it's a big fucking deal for anyone who asked WHY as their main profession.

If Kyle signs the NDA, he can't use any sources from inside Nvidia without being liable for breaking the NDA. Any data Nvidia deems to be Confidential cannot be shared with the rest of the world until Nvidia clears the data, and that includes any insider information from other Nvidia employees.

Nvidia is free to mark any insider data provided by an employee as Confidential.
 
I think the most disturbing aspect of all of this is that everyone feels the need to cast this as a binary conflict of good vs evil and can't wait to claim their virtue by, at zero personal risk, taking a stand against the evil corporate overlord.

If a shady NDA is all it takes to get you to switch to a crappy, slow GPU, then fine, but why are you even here?

Do you think everything you own and consume is produced and sold by choir boys?

These are aggressive, self serving policies but guess what? Nvidia has a fiduciary duty to their share holders to be aggressive and self serving.

Nobody is being forced to sign anything and if not signing means you don't get free review samples, then oh well, that's how the world works; If you don't want to put out, don't be surprised when your sugar daddy cuts you off and you have to pay your own way.

On the list of evil tech companies that censor political dissent, collude with totalitarian regimes, undermine the first and second amendment, collect and leak your data and use algos to literally alter the public perception of news and events, Nvidia doesn't make the list.
Maybe they will at some point, but not right now. I'll take a cutthroat, sharp elbow company trying to make a buck and wreck the competition over a bunch of totalitarian millennial assholes who want to take my guns, speech and national sovereignty - every single time.
 
To quell any notion that signers (assuming GN signed it) can only publish "positive" pieces on Nvidia, look at what's the very first follow up video to land right after GN covered the Nvidia NDA:

upload_2018-6-27_14-54-20.png


I don't see this piece to be "for benefit of Nvidia" :ROFLMAO:
 
  • Like
Reactions: amenx
like this
SPARTAN VI said:
To quell any notion that signers (assuming GN signed it) can only publish "positive" pieces on Nvidia, look at what's the very first follow up video to land right after GN covered the Nvidia NDA:

View attachment 84688

I don't see this piece to be "for benefit of Nvidia"
Click to expand...
Did he have to ask permission first? That is the question on the NDA!
 
SPARTAN VI said:
To quell any notion that signers (assuming GN signed it) can only publish "positive" pieces on Nvidia, look at what's the very first follow up video to land right after GN covered the Nvidia NDA:

View attachment 84688

I don't see this piece to be "for benefit of Nvidia" :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
As I have stated multiple times in this thread, this NDA has nothing to do with card reviewers. This has everything to do with tech journalists.

Do you find it odd that NVIDIA has operated since its dawn without this type of NDA in place while having many card launches under its belt, but once it loses face over GPP, that something like this is rolled out?
 
Brokennails said:
Kyle, ever feel like Sigourney in Aliens?

"Did I.Q.'S suddenly drop while I was away?"

Not sure how may times you have to explain it lol.
Click to expand...
On one hand, I have to live with all you dumb bastards on a daily basis.

On the other hand, I get the gift of it being totally my choice to live with you dumb bastards on a daily basis. ;)
 
Brokennails said:
Kyle, ever feel like Sigourney in Aliens?

"Did I.Q.'S suddenly drop while I was away?"

Not sure how may times you have to explain it lol.
Click to expand...

Kyle's response was to make a point I've no contention with (e.g."this doesn't cover reviews"), which I felt was clearly my stance since I posted the GN+lawyer video twice now, which covers that same fact. So because he repeated a point that I wasn't even addressing in my response, you're calling me stupid. Can we be adults and discuss this without throwing around insults? At least one or two people (or the same guy twice lol) have already been banned for insults in this thread.
 
DoubleTap said:
I think the most disturbing aspect of all of this is that everyone feels the need to cast this as a binary conflict of good vs evil and can't wait to claim their virtue by, at zero personal risk, taking a stand against the evil corporate overlord.

If a shady NDA is all it takes to get you to switch to a crappy, slow GPU, then fine, but why are you even here?
Click to expand...

I think the GPP did it for many people.

I've been anti Nvidia since the Arkham Asylum and Arkham City debacles - where they disabled backup Nvidia cards from running PhysX if AMD cards were primary and added invisible tessellation to Arkham City to artificially slow down Radeon cards.

Having said all of that, I got a 980Ti for $200 a year ago and a Gsync 2K 165hz monitor for $250, (both used, so NV didnt get a dime).

These are aggressive, self serving policies but guess what? Nvidia has a fiduciary duty to their share holders to be aggressive and self serving.
Click to expand...

I really don't believe these tactics have caused anything but negative perception. I don't believe one ounce of their current market superiority has anything to do with the attempt at GPP, TWIMTBP antics, or anything else. It's strictly about having the best engineering talent at the moment.

Maybe they will at some point, but not right now.
Click to expand...

I would be the least surprised I've ever been if I found out Geforce drivers contained spyware.

I'll take a cutthroat, sharp elbow company trying to make a buck and wreck the competition over a bunch of totalitarian millennial assholes who want to take my guns, speech and national sovereignty - every single time.
Click to expand...

I'm a far right wing conservative who's been against Nvidia's practices for some time.... the ideas are not mutually exclusive.
 
dook43 said:
I think the GPP did it for many people.

I've been anti Nvidia since the Arkham Asylum and Arkham City debacles - where they disabled backup Nvidia cards from running PhysX if AMD cards were primary and added invisible tessellation to Arkham City to artificially slow down Radeon cards.

Having said all of that, I got a 980Ti for $200 a year ago and a Gsync 2K 165hz monitor for $250, (both used, so NV didnt get a dime).



I really don't believe these tactics have caused anything but negative perception. I don't believe one ounce of their current market superiority has anything to do with the attempt at GPP, TWIMTBP antics, or anything else. It's strictly about having the best engineering talent at the moment.



I would be the least surprised I've ever been if I found out Geforce drivers contained spyware.



I'm a far right wing conservative who's been against Nvidia's practices for some time.... the ideas are not mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...


That's fine, the evils of Nvidia are easily avoided, but I'm not above sullying myself to indulge in their pixel pushing pleasures.
 
Wow, it's like that nvidia crusader pic I posted in another thread recently has magical powers, because it summoned some of the same people it did when I originally posted it and have been rather absent otherwise.
 
Well, both of my desktop computers and now my laptop are fully AMD hardware and nothing less. Nvidia will not be getting any of my money but then again, it is not like they were ever looking out for me anyways. AMD, on the other hand, seems to look out for the customer quite a bit better now. :) (Of course, that is how they make money because without the customers, there is no money.)
 
defaultluser said:
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.

Theoretically nvidia could ruin your investigative journalism parade by telling you about GPP, but you and I both know that's not how confidential information is handled.

They won't tell you about GPP preemptively because the more people who know it, the more likely it is to leak. That's the exact opposites invention of selective classification documents like this.

Just remember it's a whole lot easier to find the source of a single leak than the source of hundreds of different leaks. If they provided GPP to every journalist in existence, their entire purpose for having the NDA would be destroyed.
Click to expand...
I thought about this specifically and had the same thought process as you did before your post... But here is the thing, you gotta think more malicious and lawyerly... Take yield problems.. nvidia would know if they are great or they are shit, say they are shit, and they know its possible the info might leak, as these things does... What do you do? You send an innocent info release to all of your partners that signed this endless NDA.. you send them 'confidential information' that yields for the lastest hottest card are going as expected or as per recent projections. The leak breaks big, the chips are yielding bad, and might even need some rework and delays for big volume... Now if you signed this nda, and got this ci note, you are essentially gagged as you are liable for comments on the big leak.. yeah go ahead and make a video, or even have a conversation with others in you tube about nvidias crappy yields and all that means... You COULD get away with it, or you could be sued and tied up in court with nvidia, rightfully in many ways arguing you broke the nda, and that you already had info on yields as confidential information before the leak... Sure nvidia might lose long run.. that is a fact, yes they may lose... but at what cost? To them? Nothing. To the little guy, everything. They probably would not sue right way to anyone, i aam sure they will send gentle reminders first.
 
Wow... I may still buy nVidia but it will never be a new purchase again. I'll give my money to a forum member for a gently used card or I'll buy an AMD graphics card instead.

Cobalt35 said:
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?
Click to expand...

Because Jen Hsun Huang's ego?
 
Last edited:
Got sign off on a statement from my attorney that specializes in IP law...for 20 years. And keep in mind this is casual conversation between him and I, not a drafted statement. And he does make comment on GN's attorney's take.

If I’m a reporter, I probably would not sign it. I could pick on several elements but basically, it is intended to provide a strong control over work product of the reporters. The definition of confidential information is way too broad. Broadest I’ve ever seen, and I’ve seen and drafted and enforced a large number of these. Also, the typical exclusions to confidential information are not provided, but they exist at common law anyway. The 5 year duration of the obligation is just stupid for this type of technology. It’s pretty ridiculous top to bottom.

I don’t really agree with the interviewed attorney. He seems to think it very reasonable and “not that onerous.” I have to wonder what he thinks is. It’s a very heavy-handed way to deal with the media.
 
^ but any CI you were given while you were still a signatory to the NDA would still be protected for those 5 years. For instance, Nvidia talks to you about their revolutionary new GPP 2 program, you cannot opt out of the NDA and publish all the juicy details from that conversation for 5 years.
 
SPARTAN VI said:
^ but any CI you were given while you were still a signatory to the NDA would still be protected for those 5 years. For instance, Nvidia talks to you about their revolutionary new GPP 2 program, you cannot opt out of the NDA and publish all the juicy details from that conversation for 5 years.
Click to expand...
Sure, but so what? You are no longer accepting further CI and are free from the NDA thereafter. Whoopee do for the CI already given. Its not like a journos life rests on one story that he must be silent about for a few years. The tech press has loads of stories, events to always keep them busy.
 
NDAs are non-binding for criminal or illegal activity. If someone signed the NDA and knew about something like GPP, they might feel pressured to not disclose it publicly to avoid being destroyed financially. However, they should submit evidence to the AGs and commissions.
 
-PK- said:
NDAs are non-binding for criminal or illegal activity. If someone signed the NDA and knew about something like GPP, they might feel pressured to not disclose it publicly to avoid being destroyed financially. However, they should submit evidence to the AGs and commissions.
Click to expand...

They tend to be non-binding all around as it is very difficult to prove harm unless it's egregious. In most countries, contracts have to clearly benefit both parties in a specific way to be enforceable. The US is the only country I know of that still allows lopsidedness (and vague terms). A Canadian judge would strike the offending clauses, chastise the lawyer for drafting it, and then let them have a go at trying what was left.
 
exlink said:
The discrete GPU industry sucks. Our choices are basically between an anti-consumer company or an under-performing company.

I really hope Intel enters the arena with something worthwhile.
Click to expand...
With our luck, Intel will enter the arena with something both under-performing and anti-consumer.
 
I remember when you guys pissed off AMD for telling the truth about Nano. Luckily you have a strong enough follower base that you can survive pissing off these giants. Kudos to you [H]ardOCP.

But reading the NDA, I don't really interpret it as saying, "You can't give negative press to our products." I interpret it as being similar to other NDAs except being a catch-all for all products for 5 years. It would seem, once an embargo is lifted on a product, that you are free from the agreement, and you should be able to give negative press.

I'm no lawyer.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top