Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 47,151
Nvidia have a monopoly. This kind of practice results. Come on AMD.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
NVIDIA Looks to Gag Journalists with Multi-Year Blanket NDAs
- Thread starter Satchfanuk
- Start date
Yes thats the idea. That is why also selling the Ti for a Vega 64
I need new monitor so not wanting to buy gsync one, and Vega 64 would work with the 55NU8000 Freesync planning to get for the bedroom.
Already found a colleague today to sell the 55KS7000
From a company which just got burnt when its plans to strong arm partners into handing over their gaming brands were exposed.
Lets try it again with all major journalists on a new NDA that specifically forbids using confidential information to bash Nvidia with.
So someone leaks confidential info about Nvidia to a journalist signed to the new NDA... How odd, they can't publish it...
Strange that people have difficulty seeing how this undermines reporting.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Just get the 11s out FFS!
I can guarantee you AMD will have an almost identical NDA thta will also prohibit posting confidential information
You're not just saying trust me are you?
You're missing or avoiding the point that the revision is to specifically forbid what happened with the GPP. Confidential information was leaked by the partners and journalists were happy to run with it because there was no deal on it.
Therefore this is to tie up all major tech journalists and prevent them from using any confidential information they are given by anyone if it's not beneficial to Nvidia.
It actually doesn't matter who else has similar clauses. Nvidia got burnt doing something naughty and this is their response, to tighten NDA.
Any future reporting on non-officially sanctioned information is choked and cannot be picked up by the mainstream who are signing because guaranteed preferential access to Nvidia is more valuable than possible leaks in the future.
Associate
- Joined
- 6 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 2,159
- Location
- Nottingham
its no good trying to reason with people who are not willing to accept any other angle other than there own. its just amazing that people would be willing to defend something like this, but worse things have happened in the world and most people don't care unless it affects them.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,747
- Location
- Planet Earth
BTW,the website who leaked this are part of this group:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Heise
Its not only a website,but several paper publications,and 700 employees,and seem to be quite well known in Germany,so you could argue it would be very counterproductive for them,unless they felt there was an issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Heise
Its not only a website,but several paper publications,and 700 employees,and seem to be quite well known in Germany,so you could argue it would be very counterproductive for them,unless they felt there was an issue.
This is exactly how an NDA works, any NDA written by any attorney worthy of charging will have a near identical clause.
The rest of what you say is mostly nonsense. Reviewers can post anything negative they want about Nvidia, as long as that information is not confidential, which is self-explanatory for anyone with the slightest understanding what an NDA means.
Here is the kicker, no one has to sign an NDA. Anyone can review a Nvidia product and give a bad review. Plenty of people do all the time.
And whop claims Nvidia is tightening their NDA? Do we have an earlier version to compare? The most likely reason Nvidia sent out a new NDa is because they have new graphics cards to release and want to get an up to date list of reviewers who are entitled to get a review card and confidential information. There is typically a new NDA from for each new major product release. IF a review wants a shiny new 2080 to review along with the tasty details they will have to sign a new NDA.
I deal with NDA's once or twice a month at work in my position as European CEO of a tech company. The Nvidia NDA looks completely unremarkable
They don;t publish reviews on release day as far as I know, so they have nothing to loose but a lot to gain in stirring up hysteria among the AMD crowd. It is very popular to bash Nvidia these days, quite possibly they deserve a lot of flack, but this is really a complete non-story.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,747
- Location
- Planet Earth
Its not only the website,but the magazine too which refused to the sign the NDA - its in the original German article. The magazine alone has over 300000 circulation in Germany(started in 1983) and,and the group over 100 million Euro a year income. I hardly think they would be caring about a few clicks here and there. Posting this would have implications for their entire operation if Nvidia cuts them off. The online part has been there since 1996,and they have been publishing since 1949.
But they don;t publish release day reviews so it really has no impact on them. The fact that the company is large means it is even more meaningless unlike the standard one man band internet reviewers that absolutely depend on those release day clicks.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,747
- Location
- Planet Earth
They actually have the resources to have a proper legal department so something has been picked up,and they probably been signing NDAs for 40 years. Nvidia would not be sending them an NDA unless they were going to events,getting samples,etc.
Its a website and a whole lot of magazines,which are directly going to be impacted by this in both consumer and professional disclosures,like being invited to events or getting technical disclosures. Being large and having such a diversified financial base,means they are far less likely to be driven by clicks anyway,so it serves them no real purpose to get blacklisted by Nvidia which would have a bigger impact on them,especially with 700 employees. They certainly have more costs than some one man band website.
To put in context,Purch group,has between 251 to 500 people in total and that includes Toms Hardware,Anandtech and Laptop Mag and loads of other websites.
Seems a bit of an own goal otherwise.
Last edited:
Your dodging of my point is comical. Along with the lack of reply when I asked you if you had any proof to go with your personal word that AMD has the same.
But I'm ok with backing up what I was saying.
But I said nothing about no negative reviews. That's a fake paragraph of argument from your side.
Take a 3rd try I guess?
@D.P. as you deal with NDAs regularly, what is this NDA exactly saying?
If it's saying "no talking about specific products before they come out when you get review samples" then it's a standard NDA and all a fuss over nothing.
If it's saying "no talking about us in any way unless we say so" then there's a big problem as that's Nvidia attempting to control the media and, by extension, public perception of them.
If it's saying "no talking about specific products before they come out when you get review samples" then it's a standard NDA and all a fuss over nothing.
If it's saying "no talking about us in any way unless we say so" then there's a big problem as that's Nvidia attempting to control the media and, by extension, public perception of them.
It isn't really clear on this point - if nVidia told someone in confidence that the GPU was only working at full speed for 3.5GB of the VRAM then the NDA would bind them to keep it confidential but it isn't clear if it extends to if they discovered that fact for themselves or not.
WTF dude? Come down and remember that gaming on our PCs is a hobby. With statements like yours, I worry for the future of life, let alone a GPU bought for fun purposes!
He is downplaying the whole subject by insulting everyone who's against it as "AMD crowd"
Last edited:
I agree, no need for talk like that.