• RandoCalrandian
    link
    fedilink
    101 year ago

    They don’t need an NDA for that, and he certainly knows better than to sign one.

    This is fishy to the extreme

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      Not really. Most big corporations require a NDA to use their toilets. Slight exaggeration but not by much.

      Wait and see.

        • conciselyverbose
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          It’s because they’re publicly traded.

          Information about their plans being in the wild but not formally announced adds all kinds of possibility for SEC involvement. You have to be very careful with how information is publicized to avoid insider trading or the appearance of it.

          • RandoCalrandian
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            NDAs contribute to insider trading, not mitigate it.

            It means the people who know they are doing shitty things can’t warn everyone else

            • conciselyverbose
              link
              fedilink
              21 year ago

              No, they don’t. If you can’t track where information is, the ability of people to act on a tip massively increases, and the enforcement is much more difficult.

              They are effectively legally required to use NDAs when discussing future directions of their business. There may not be an explicit regulation you can point to, but when information is spread around without tight control and someone acts on it, the SEC can and very willingly does get involved. There’s a reason it’s effectively universal for any publicly traded company with meaningful legal representation, and it’s because it’s a ridiculous level of negligence to have those conversations without them.