3 ms·

I've worked for companies in the journalism space. Calling up legal to see if we had an NDA with a company before reporting on them was not exactly a part of th

I've worked for companies in the journalism space. Calling up legal to see if we had an NDA with a company before reporting on them was not exactly a part of the routine for the reporters. If this reporter had no reason to suspect NDA -- and the way in which press inquiries were responded to certainly wouldn't give that impression -- then it's not on the reporter.

stickfigure 9y ago
It's "on the reporter" to keep their employer out of legal trouble, even if it means fixing things after the employer screws up. Or they can just do whatever they want and get fired.
JumpCrisscross 9y ago
> If this reporter had no reason to suspect NDA -- and the way in which press inquiries were responded to certainly wouldn't give that impression -- then it's not on the reporter She still violated an agreement her employer signed. If Google decided to pursue this, it would probably result in censure for Forbes. They, in turn, would seek to exploit the reporter's employment contract. Given the number of unknowns, it is difficult to speculate. She acted reasonably, given what she knew, though her reaction with full information betrays naïveté. TL; DR Forbes asking her to take down the article was perfectly reasonable. Her continuing to discuss it now that she knows it contained confidential information is not. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.
DannyBee 9y ago
Whether on the reporter or not, it would still be an nda violation, and that's a IMHO reasonable reason to pull a story. I'd also be wildly shocked if the presentation/information given was not stamped "Google Confidential and Proprietary". I have never seen one that isn't in this situation. That is explicitly done to signal that it's a thing covered under an NDA. If your company signs NDA's, and isn't telling people who may receive the information that "getting stuff marked confidential means it's under that NDA", you are eventually in for a world of hurt and contractual damages.

stickfigure 9y ago

It's "on the reporter" to keep their employer out of legal trouble, even if it means fixing things after the employer screws up. Or they can just do whatever they want and get fired.

JumpCrisscross 9y ago

> If this reporter had no reason to suspect NDA -- and the way in which press inquiries were responded to certainly wouldn't give that impression -- then it's not on the reporter She still violated an agreement her employer signed. If Google decided to pursue this, it would probably result in censure for Forbes. They, in turn, would seek to exploit the reporter's employment contract. Given the number of unknowns, it is difficult to speculate. She acted reasonably, given what she knew, though her reaction with full information betrays naïveté. TL; DR Forbes asking her to take down the article was perfectly reasonable. Her continuing to discuss it now that she knows it contained confidential information is not. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.

DannyBee 9y ago

Whether on the reporter or not, it would still be an nda violation, and that's a IMHO reasonable reason to pull a story. I'd also be wildly shocked if the presentation/information given was not stamped "Google Confidential and Proprietary". I have never seen one that isn't in this situation. That is explicitly done to signal that it's a thing covered under an NDA. If your company signs NDA's, and isn't telling people who may receive the information that "getting stuff marked confidential means it's under that NDA", you are eventually in for a world of hurt and contractual damages.