<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The LII and cold-forming</title>
	<link>http://blog.law.cornell.edu/tbruce/2008/07/13/the-lii-and-cold-forming/</link>
	<description>Tom Bruce\'s blog</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:06:58 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sean Murphy</title>
		<link>http://blog.law.cornell.edu/tbruce/2008/07/13/the-lii-and-cold-forming/#comment-18</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean Murphy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:39:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.law.cornell.edu/tbruce/2008/07/13/the-lii-and-cold-forming/#comment-18</guid>
		<description>Tom's description of the challenges faced when protecting our technology and preventing the almost inevitable "transfer" was spot on.  Developing an understanding of what is legally possible or defensible is difficult if you are not a lawyer.  It is equally challenging to describe the desired parameters  to lawyers who do not  have any understanding of my business.  Use of a resource such as the LII can provide some understanding of the law, but it is still information written by and for lawyers, framed in legal terms.  For those of you who are wood workers, it is a lot like trying to plane a small hollow out of a large panel with that jointer plane I am looking for - you will have to go through a lot of material to get there.  Count my vote in favor of improved transparency.

As Tom points out, the use of non-disclosure agreements has a beneficial effect: it provides a good preliminary understanding between parties.  However, the effectiveness of the agreement goes only as far as the ethics of the larger party.  The resources required to enforce the agreement in today's legal industry is prohibitive for a small business. Not to mention the collateral costs associated with being the plaintiff (read: aggressor) in such an action. 

I would say that leading folks to believe that I "introduced the use of the non-disclosure agreement to [my] industry" would be giving me just a little too much credit.  It would be accurate to say that I introduced it to my business and would love to see others do the same - if only the small manufacturing masses would follow that siren's call.  While it can get you dashed on the proverbial rocks with a prospective customer, the net effect of using the NDA as a business tool will ultimately provide safer waters for all of us.  It will also raise awareness that the specialized knowledge gained as a manufacturer is hard won, has value and is worth protecting.  Not to mention compensation.

By the way, I am still looking for that Stanley #8 jointer plane with the frog adjusting screw if anyone is interested in an "old technology" transfer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tom&#8217;s description of the challenges faced when protecting our technology and preventing the almost inevitable &#8220;transfer&#8221; was spot on.  Developing an understanding of what is legally possible or defensible is difficult if you are not a lawyer.  It is equally challenging to describe the desired parameters  to lawyers who do not  have any understanding of my business.  Use of a resource such as the LII can provide some understanding of the law, but it is still information written by and for lawyers, framed in legal terms.  For those of you who are wood workers, it is a lot like trying to plane a small hollow out of a large panel with that jointer plane I am looking for - you will have to go through a lot of material to get there.  Count my vote in favor of improved transparency.</p>
<p>As Tom points out, the use of non-disclosure agreements has a beneficial effect: it provides a good preliminary understanding between parties.  However, the effectiveness of the agreement goes only as far as the ethics of the larger party.  The resources required to enforce the agreement in today&#8217;s legal industry is prohibitive for a small business. Not to mention the collateral costs associated with being the plaintiff (read: aggressor) in such an action. </p>
<p>I would say that leading folks to believe that I &#8220;introduced the use of the non-disclosure agreement to [my] industry&#8221; would be giving me just a little too much credit.  It would be accurate to say that I introduced it to my business and would love to see others do the same - if only the small manufacturing masses would follow that siren&#8217;s call.  While it can get you dashed on the proverbial rocks with a prospective customer, the net effect of using the NDA as a business tool will ultimately provide safer waters for all of us.  It will also raise awareness that the specialized knowledge gained as a manufacturer is hard won, has value and is worth protecting.  Not to mention compensation.</p>
<p>By the way, I am still looking for that Stanley #8 jointer plane with the frog adjusting screw if anyone is interested in an &#8220;old technology&#8221; transfer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
