NVIDIA NDA & HardOCP - POLL

HardOCP Signs the NVIDIA NDA for 2080 Launch Access?

  • Yes

  • No

Results are only viewable after voting.
FrgMstr

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
56,143
A moment of truth is here. We reached out to NVIDIA recently, and we asked to be included in the RTX launch.

Please consider this our request to be part of NVIDIA next-gen desktop GPU review launch. As you know we have always provided a fair and balanced review system for two decades....
Click to expand...

Much to our surprise, this is the response we have gotten from NVIDIA this morning.

Sure, no problem. Attached is our standard NDA, just sign it and return to me. We’ll start there and get things sorted when I get back to the US.
Click to expand...

As you know, we are not big fans of the new NDA from NVIDIA. There is no doubt in our minds that this NDA was formulated because of our coverage of GPP. Many that do business with NVIDIA have told us exactly that.

That aside, this is a big decision and we wanted to get your feedback on this. Signing this NDA will get us 2080 access for launch day and of course will save us quite a bit of money in terms of review samples. We spent $4300 yesterday and that is a lot of money.

Untitled-4.jpg Untitled-6.jpg

We do have to appreciate NVIDIA putting the ball back into our court as it has fully given us the ability to have RTX 2080 access, and at the same time, we can no longer bring up the fact that "NVIDIA cut us off over GPP." Well played NVIDIA, well played.

The question I have for you is, do we sign this multi-year NDA, or do we keep on our current path? Is launch day access worth signing an NDA that we have issue with? The poll is above.
 
Last edited:
Yes.

Nothing in the NDA prevents an [H]onest review.

Nvidia's main thing seems to be trying to clamp down on the baseball hat youtube bros and their "2080 Ti EARLY BENCHEZ LEAKED!" clickbait videos. For review sites like [H] it'll be business as usual.
 
Last edited:
I say no. While I understand that you wouldn't have a review at the same time as most sites, the reason we come here is worth far more than getting hard ocp a launch day coverage.

We who come here will wait for a real review, even one post launch.
 
I think not signing it will hurt the site because you will have to buy your own samples for reviews and will likely get them later than everyone else
 
I would sign it, Kyle. I'm somehow in the minority here apparently. You shouldn't have to be paying $4000 out of pocket for every GPU release. Just read it over carefully. So long as you're comfortable with it I say sign it.
 
A few points.

  1. Don't sign.
  2. My MOST important point is this: I don't come here for the first reviews. I come here for the best reviews.
  3. You shelled out a ton of cash for those cards. It's a bummer, I'm sure. I'm also damn sure you can sell them for what you paid as soon as you're done with them. Hell, put a signature on one of the coolers and add some value to a seller on this forum. Yea, the fanbase is that strong.
  4. This is a good reminder that I really should help fund you guys on Patreon. Even if it's just a few bucks a month - I spend as much time on this site reading reviews, news, deals, and 'for sale' each day as I do in the car listening to NPR.
  5. Also, why no 2070 order? Oh yea, you already spent an assload of money on the other cards.
EDIT: Like = Patreon. I did it. Even a buck or 2 a month helps out. If you believe in this points, put your money where your 'likes' are.
 
Last edited:
Wow. Seriously tough decision. I wouldn't hold it against you if you agree to the terms because the cost of independently obtaining the cards is prohibitive.

Just for reference, how does this compare to other NDAs you have signed in the past? Five years seems a bit draconian.
 
Realistically, would they even get it to you early enough to do a proper [H] review?

We are all willing to wait a few days for something better than canned benchmarks so probably no reason to sign a deal with the devil
 
While I know you would be unbiased in your review whether you are under Nvidia's NDA. I have to worry if another story breaks about Nvidia doing something stupid you will be essentially bound and gagged with them. I don't think it's worth it as you'll be just like the others under the NDA. Yes the 2080 expenses you just incurred could be remedied by selling them off shortly after since they are retail and not review samples. Or just cancel the order and I'm sure someone here would be more than happy to share their's for the purpose of the review. I've seen it a few times with AMD cards when they were in short supply for other reviewers.
 
Do you want to grow a big YouTube business and be part of the FIRST! movement? Get more and more followers, subs and get paid?? Sign the NDA. If none of that matters and htis is more grass-roots, don't sign it...and do a GoFundMe for samples. Or offer to split the cost with a community member for a review sample.....again, lots of options that don't involve signing the paper to get the free trial hardware.

There's no wrong answer here....I'd be more concerned if there was an NDA you had to sign to get a chair....if those fail, people get HURT. :)
 
CombatChrisNC said:
A few points.
  1. Don't sign.
  2. My MOST important point is this: I don't come here for the first reviews. I come here for the best reviews.
  3. You shelled out a ton of cash for those cards. It's a bummer, I'm sure. I'm also damn sure you can sell them for what you paid as soon as you're done with them. Hell, put a signature on one of the coolers and add some value to a seller on this forum. Yea, the fanbase is that strong.
Click to expand...

This. The money you (Kyle) will have to shell out for cards, if necessary, will probably be more of a short-time investment :D
 
How does this NDA compares to the previous launch NDAs?

Only thing I don't like is the Multi-Year NDA, that seem pretty odd I think for a product-line up launch. At this moment, I'll say NO only to the Multi-Year and based on Principal of how nVidia treated you. If you feel that this NDA fell in line strongly with the previous NDAs which you've signed then I'll say it'll be a good business deal to take on without compromising your convictions.

Edit - I read the NDA - Don't sign that garbage.
 
I've read their NDA that you posted (not sure if there is a longer one than the two page document) and I don't see at all how it restricts or limits your journalistic integrity in any way.

It specifically mentions over and over that there are limitations on Confidential information. Which is basically all any NDA usually covers. So yes, I think HardOCP should sign it because I don't see it harming the integrity of your work.

When I think about the GPP coverage and how that would be any different if you guys were under a multi-year NDA, I see it playing out the exact same way. GPP was publicly announced and therefore news posts hypothesizing on the fallout of such a program, such as your coverage, would have fallen outside of such an NDA.

I don't know, maybe I'm not looking at this the right way but I don't see any negatives and I definitely don't see this NDA being structured such that the signers become marketing tools. But you guys would also need to weigh in what possible positives come from this other than obtaining samples that you don't have to pay for out of pocket for. That's where cost analysis would come into play.
 
I may have an unpopular vote here but i say sign it. Only one condition, your laywer says you can't be placed on the hook finacially for giving a fair honest review given how shitty a product is or isn't. If your laywer thinks you won't be tongue tied by the NDA from being honest then. The answer is yes.
If it could ruin your Journalistic integrity and ruin you career to speak out, then the answer is No.
For now I vote Yes, but its pending professional analysis.
 
Kyle, that is a financial decision that I don't think even us donators can make. I said NO but I don't pay the bills for you with my little $10 a month donation. Paying out of pocket for cards or do the donations and other areas cover it? If you find yourself financially tightening the belt without signing NDA, it's a pretty straight answer. I love this site, but wouldn't want to you to go out paying for everything whille others get review sample free, with a little NDA. Unless that NDA says straight up LIE FOR US OR ELSE, sign the damn thing.
 
SomeoneElse said:
I may have an unpopular vote here but i say sign it. Only one condition, your laywer says you can't be placed on the hook finacially for giving a fair honest review given how shitty a product is or isn't. If your laywer thinks you won't be tongue tied by the NDA from being honest then. The answer is yes.
If it could ruin your Journalistic integrity and ruin you career to speak out, then the answer is No.
For now I vote Yes, but its pending professional analysis.
Click to expand...

THIS ^^^

My guess to the card? Good potential, but games and drivers aren't optimized. But, build it and games will come.
 
I don't think the NDA is all that bad: it only applies to info provided by NVidia to the signer, and no longer applies to information that someone else publishes (even if that someone else breached the NDA to do it.)

But that said, it's really about freedom and integrity. Both of those are going to cost you, but they're also why a [H]ardOCP review is the single most important input I use in making my buying decisions.

So I voted no: don't sign. Don't become a proxy for NVidia's marketing department.
Stay free and stay [H]ard.
 
If by signing the NDA, you think that it might negativity affect the ability of [H]ard|OCP now and/or in the future to provide fair, unbiased reviews of hardware from any company and/or there is something in the NDA you don't agree with, then don't sign it.

Personally I don't have a problem with it and I have to read and interpret software contracts and EULAs on a frequent basis for my job.
 
SomeoneElse said:
Only one condition, your lawyer says you can't be placed on the hook finacially for giving a fair honest review given how shitty a product is or isn't. If your lawyer thinks you won't be tongue tied by the NDA from being honest then. The answer is yes.
If it could ruin your Journalistic integrity and ruin you career to speak out, then the answer is No.
Click to expand...

Yea, that's clean. I could get behind that.

... like it's my call to make.
 
I don't know that a being a few days later necessarily hurts the site much. This site has enough prestige that I wouldn't think you would need a Day 0 review to draw traffic, and it also helps to give it some distance from the noise of all the other Day 0 reviews that always flood once the embargo date hits. A good review takes time anyway, and the way most Day 0 reviews read, the reviews only have a couple of days at most to run a few benchmarks, which is hardly a complete picture.

The having to pay for review samples does hurt the pocketbook, but it certainly helps to reenforce credibility. If money is a serious problem (and I can understand that), as ontariotl mentions, I'm sure you have no shortage of users who would float a loan for the purposes of a review and only ask to get paid a shoutout and custom title.

I could see signing an NDA for a single piece of hardware, but a multiyear NDA is harder to swallow. Who knows what could hit next year, or the year after, and you'd be stuck with an NDA you had signed years earlier and only the benefit of hindsight.

I vote no, but I can also understand if you do choose to sign, as it's your business.
 
Kyle

You have access to the numbers. You can determine what is the best choice for HardOCP.

Please take into consideration Nvidia's recent attempts with GPP. Why did they back down from GPP? This is the same company that was trying to lock everyone in the GPP. Is this a company that you want to be locked in on a multi-year NDA with?
 
Sonicks said:
I've read their NDA that you posted (not sure if there is a longer one than the two page document) and I don't see at all how it restricts or limits your journalistic integrity in any way.

It specifically mentions over and over that there are limitations on Confidential information. Which is basically all any NDA usually covers. So yes, I think HardOCP should sign it because I don't see it harming the integrity of your work.

When I think about the GPP coverage and how that would be any different if you guys were under a multi-year NDA, I see it playing out the exact same way. GPP was publicly announced and therefore news posts hypothesizing on the fallout of such a program, such as your coverage, would have fallen outside of such an NDA.

I don't know, maybe I'm not looking at this the right way but I don't see any negatives and I definitely don't see this NDA being structured such that the signers become marketing tools. But you guys would also need to weigh in what possible positives come from this other than obtaining samples that you don't have to pay for out of pocket for. That's where cost analysis would come into play.
Click to expand...

While I agree with you on the NDA, Nvidia still cut Kyle off after the whole GPP story broke even though he had every right to report it. So what's the point of a NDA if even you legally stay inside the boundaries that are required Nvidia will still blacklist you. That's why I voted No.
 
i voted yes,
i think Kyle knew what he wanted to do since he contacted them in the first place. but if he doesnt sign after seeing the NDA because he didnt like it for whatever reason, im sure they were good reasons.
gg

Kyle keep up the good work :)
 
Kyle, sign the NDA and spare the expense.

Everyone on this board knows good and well that once your review comes out you will give it to us straight. I am already highly skeptical of this product and just how ready it actually is to deliver ray tracing at an acceptable cost or speed.

We need your voice, and you need enough headway to review the product before it's release.
 
I agree that the NDA is not out of bounds based on any other NDA I have personally signed. It does not appear to impact your ability to do creative reviews or your journalistic integrity.

GN did a great video on the NDA, with a lawyer, for anyone who is concerned about it.

edit: GNN changed to GN. It's not the Galactic News Network...
 
1. Sign it. (Read carefully though)

2. We know NDA won't affect your quality of report.

3. Not signing it puts financial constraints on future reviews we may not have gotten otherwise. Aka more content (Which you could use honestly)
 
on principle alone i'd say fuck the NDA and nvidia.. but in reality i'd say sign it, like sonicks said, unless there was more to the NDA we didn't get to see i don't see anything in it that negatively effects the site nor journalism as a whole, the only thing they're doing is restricting information that falls under a product NDA, something like GPP doesn't fall under any NDA.


changed my vote to no after reading more of the thread.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: otg
like this
Very cool to be upfront on this and engage your audience. I am choosing not to vote - do what you think is best and I will still respect your decision either way.
I don't have enough knowledge (nor do I expect/need to have it) on what [H] pulls in through adverts & patron, or the fine details of the NDA.

Your integrity matters the most to me, and I have no doubts that it will continue to be exemplary as always.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top