It would be interesting to compare the two but we need someone who is annoyed at AMD enough to spill the beans.
-
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
It would be interesting to compare the two but we need someone who is annoyed at AMD enough to spill the beans.
If the 1160 costs over £500 for a 10% performance improvement, what are the chances of Jensen "violating Nvidia's no fraternisation policy"?
If the 1160 costs over £500 for a 10% performance improvement, what are the chances in Jensen "breaking Nvidia's no fraternisation policy"?
Because it is an entirely harmless clause. Of cause Nvidia has the right to dictate to people under their NDA what information is confidential. Again, This is the whole damn point of an NDA. Nvidia can tell a review a release date of a GPU, and state that information is confidential under the terms of the NDA.
if Nvidia can;t tell journalists which information is confidential then the entire NDA is worthless. It is not up to the journalists to decide what is confidential, it is the entity providing the confidential information that has that right.
With the example iof the GPP, Nvidia would have to tell every single journalists about the GPP before there was any kind of leak. If a leak happens, all journalists will be free to publish information about the leaked GPP. The only thing nvidia could do would be to send every single journalist detailed information about the GPP, and make them aware the information is under NDA. At that point, everything known in the public domain can still be discussed.
there is nothing pre-emptive about it. The only thing nvidia can do is post-active fire control to try and silence reviewers. But they can only do that giving reviewerrs factual information, and they can't force reviewers to maintain the NDA. If a reviewer was so outraged at the leaked information, they could nullify their NDA contract and not receive any information form Nvidia.
Jens is sociopathic, you may think i'm trying to upset nVidia fans but actually its a trait a lot of successful CEO's share.
nVidia have got to the stage where there is almost nothing left to gain, to a sociopath this is a problem because his fix of one-upmanship other the other guys is becoming harder and harder to come by, the harder it becomes to more extreme the things they do to get more success, eventually it gets to the stage were they become completely unhinged and a liability to the company, at that stage one of two things happen, the BOD push them out, or they take the whole company with them spectacularly.
Classic beta male behaviour
I think the company would do much better with new leadership. Do Nvidia have an Alfa 
It would be interesting to compare the two but we need someone who is annoyed at AMD enough to spill the beans.
We have plenty of those people. I can think of at least 20.
I've owned far mroe AMD gpus in my lifetime, currently user an old AMD 6970, just got my boss to build a brand new 16 core hteadripper box, in a few months i will build my own threadripper box.A buy what ever fits my needs, in the past that has been effortless linux drivers and fast open GL performance, more recently this has been CUDA and CUD-NN integration in tensorflow
No one said they were except you, and you were wrong.
NDAs pertain to shared confidential information.
I think we could have all predicted the list of users on here who would side with one or the other. Nice to see that no-one disappointed me.
The NDA is pre-emptive and it is specifically vaguely worded to mean anything Nvidia say it means when needed. Co-incidentally Kyle Bennett was not asked to sign this NDA, thus already kicking him out into the cold. If people get the impression that any day one reviews are suspect then this could hurt those review sites even more than signing Nvidia's NDA. Basically as with GPP, they got you by the short and curlies while paddling up **** Creek without a paddle between a rock and a hard place.
Of course Nvidia are going to put all their dirty laundry in the "Confidential Information" basket. That's what it was specifically designed to do. It was the whole point of this new NDA. GPP v2 is probably already in the works and this time none of those reviewers who signed will be able to say a word. It may not stop the info getting out completely but it will certainly slow it down, simply because Nvidia will only tell that info to those who have signed the NDA.
Those NDA signers are now, reduced more or less to an advertising arm of Nvidia. Cant wait for Adored TV's next video....gonna be a cracker!!! LOL
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 4,420
- Location
- Rugby
It would be interesting to compare the two but we need someone who is annoyed at AMD enough to spill the beans.
We already know how AMD react when you say bad things about them and there products
Having re-read the document, the remaining question I have is this:
Is this a specific NDA served with every new item/product/event/whatever, therefore a new contract undertaken each time bound to the scope of the item/product/event/whatever?
OR
Is this a single, all-encompassing contract that is served once in exchange for you to be considered a recipient of Nvidia's information in general?
Because if it's the former then there's no issue; I sign an NDA about the GTX 1180 Ti, I'm bound to hush about the GTX 1180 Ti, but the GTX 1180 Ti only. Titan V 1337 Edition comes around, bang me over a new NDA to sign.
If it's the latter thought that's open for abuse, because I am then at the mercy of whatever Nvidia consider "confidential". Now yes, I know that's the entire point, but Nvidia could hide any number of horrors (dramatic I know) behind the veil of confidentiality and pre-emptively gag reporters from blowing the whistle.
Turns out mining was never an issue, Nvidia price hiked because they could and plan on adding a further 15% premium generation-on-generation. Somebody got a sniff of it and suddenly that's confidential so I can't report it and expose that sht. The potential to give Nvidia carte blanche in suppressing any and all information is the eyebrow raiser here.
Is this a specific NDA served with every new item/product/event/whatever, therefore a new contract undertaken each time bound to the scope of the item/product/event/whatever?
OR
Is this a single, all-encompassing contract that is served once in exchange for you to be considered a recipient of Nvidia's information in general?
Because if it's the former then there's no issue; I sign an NDA about the GTX 1180 Ti, I'm bound to hush about the GTX 1180 Ti, but the GTX 1180 Ti only. Titan V 1337 Edition comes around, bang me over a new NDA to sign.
If it's the latter thought that's open for abuse, because I am then at the mercy of whatever Nvidia consider "confidential". Now yes, I know that's the entire point, but Nvidia could hide any number of horrors (dramatic I know) behind the veil of confidentiality and pre-emptively gag reporters from blowing the whistle.
Turns out mining was never an issue, Nvidia price hiked because they could and plan on adding a further 15% premium generation-on-generation. Somebody got a sniff of it and suddenly that's confidential so I can't report it and expose that sht. The potential to give Nvidia carte blanche in suppressing any and all information is the eyebrow raiser here.
You can't retroactively make information that has been released in the public domain as confidential under the NDA. To be preemptive, nvidia would first have to send all the information to the reviewers before it was ever leaked. Nvidia do not yet have the ability to travel in time. So the onyl possible way would eb to share every single technical information, secret and business ideas to every single journalists, hope they all honour the NDA, and hope that no errors are made in who has sign which NDA etc. If Nvidia did somethign like tell reviews the 970 only has 3.5GB full speed memory but they ahve to review it as 4.0GB, then they would be breaking conusmer laws and the NDA would not be valid.
Moreover, an NDA has to be extrmeely specific to have any legality:
https://everynda.com/blog/11-ways-invalidate-nda/
Funny, it sounds like I know what I'm talking about and have been right all along.
This is what I was getting it.
I wasn't talking about retrospectively adding information, I was talking about adding further information once the NDA was served. Again, individual NDAs vs a single blanket NDA. Also, and purely based on my interpretation, the NDA as presented is broad in its scope because there is no legal definition in that NDA as to what the NDA covers, rather just "any and all" information. It doesn't include something like "pertaining to ______ (referred hereafter as 'The Product')" so didn't strike me as being a product/event/item-specific NDA (unless I'm TOTALLY blind, which does happen).
That's all I'm saying.
I wasn't talking about retrospectively adding information, I was talking about adding further information once the NDA was served. Again, individual NDAs vs a single blanket NDA. Also, and purely based on my interpretation, the NDA as presented is broad in its scope because there is no legal definition in that NDA as to what the NDA covers, rather just "any and all" information. It doesn't include something like "pertaining to ______ (referred hereafter as 'The Product')" so didn't strike me as being a product/event/item-specific NDA (unless I'm TOTALLY blind, which does happen).
That's all I'm saying.
Oddly enough if I check through what you actually posted, you didn't demonstrate anything of the sort.
So an interesting retrospective claim after someone else shows what you didn't.
He's answering the question you didn't ask because he knows the answer to the question did ask makes you right.
Keep that in mind.
I don't think you understand how NDAs work. An NDA is an agreement to share confidential information. Only once the NDA is signed will they recieved information. That information has to be clearly marked as confidential. You dont get a new NDA for every communication. It always refers to a mutual agreement in general.
There is a separate legal entity called a trade secret for specific information
But that has very different uses.a journalist has no need of trade secrets, they need confidential information such as release dates. An NDA allows Nvidia to share such information to partners without it entering public domain until desired