Lucid and meaningful, to an extent, yet not particularly original, and only part of the story. The sort of article one would expect from the intelligent sidelin

Lucid and meaningful, to an extent, yet not particularly original, and only part of the story. The sort of article one would expect from the intelligent sideline. There's far more to the secrecy decision than fuzzy-benefits discussed in the article. Concrete realities include: NDAs, contractual law, history of recent legal defenses within the applicable legal jurisdiction(s), number and type of target markets vs. IP strategy (usually patents are expensive, high-maintenance, and cost scales with number of markets whereas early-stage ventures would select a "trade secret strategy"), product category (hardware vs. software), extenuating moats, network effects, and circumstances, HR non-compete feasibility in the local market and/or number of active competitors, number and motivation/commit level of HR, project-level suitability for military-style information silos as a defense-in-depth strategy, etc.