Hiku said:
sc94597 said:
This obsession with NDA's is silly tbh. Most NDA's have a lot of unenforceable stuff in them.
For example, here (Pennsylvania, U.S) the information Taylor shared would be protected despite the NDA. If Platinum wanted to sue or countersue they'd probably have an easier time with a slander case. She lives in the U.K of course and they have weaker protections there.
I've signed probably half a dozen NDAs/non-compete agreements and probably only 10% of the stuff that was in them are enforceable (mostly if I shared company code with another company really.)
|
I can't speak to what kind of NDA they have signed, possibly pertaining to Japanese laws.
But if there was no risk behind revealing the information for Taylor, there presumably shouldn't be for PG either if they did the same thinga as her and just went public with it. Yet they seem to have chosen to go a roundabout way to get that information out there instead. Which is going to reach a lot fewer eyes than if they made a public statement. So it seems like there is legal reason for them not to do that.
|
That is not how that works. Usually an NDA prevent you from conditions both parties agree on but companies are held to a higher standard when releasing personal information from non public figures. In other words, what P did could be against the law in a lot of countries while breaking and NDA is just something enforceable if the company want to take you to court and you have to pay damages specified in the NDA for the conduct. The 2 situations are not the same. I have also signed multiple NDAs for contracts. If anything in the NDA goes against, local, state or federal statues then its pretty much null.
