6 ms·

Confidential by default? Says who? Just because you say so doesn't mean everyone assumes that. It's not as though the people there didn't know that Derek rep

Confidential by default? Says who? Just because you say so doesn't mean everyone assumes that. It's not as though the people there didn't know that Derek represented a bunch of independents who would all be able to make their own decisions. And if they somehow did not know, then they're fools for not spending 5 minutes to understand how CD Baby worked and what it meant for Derek. They could have said in less than three seconds "This is all confidential." And then Derek would have had a conversation with them about what he could and couldn't say. I don't think he was at all in the wrong to not assume confidentiality at the get go. People sharing information have a responsibility to set expectations on it's use. Not the people receiving it.

parasubvert 13y ago
Says who? Anyone that's ever been involved with technology businesses for 30+ years knows you risk your relationship when you breach confidence. It's common sense. Of course, common sense is rarely common, which is why we have NDAs.
- k2xl 13y ago
  Have to disagree. If hundreds of people are "invited" it's almost like a mini conference. In fact, the entire issue was that Apple never created a relationship with him in the first place. I totally understand why under those circumstances someone wouldn't assume what was said is confidential.
  - anonyfuss 13y ago
    Well, now you know better; unless explicitly told 'you can talk about this', don't talk about it.
- msandford 13y ago
  Right, but you just assumed the model for life is "confidential unless told otherwise" and I'm saying that assertion doesn't necessarily hold. Your relationship with a secret lover? Yeah, probably. Does that same assumption hold if you're drunk, telling one of your friends (who is also drunk) something at a bar? Probably not. So what we've discovered is that context matters. The folks at Apple treated the negotiation with Derek the same as all the folks at the labels (where secrecy is probably the default and nothing needed to be said). Derek assumed that the people he was talking to understood the nature of his business (much, much different than a big music label) and would tell him if he needed to keep his trap shut. No such words were said and thus, he assumed everything was cool. Was it potentially stupid of him to assume everything was cool? Yeah maybe. But at the same time, why is it his responsibility to think to ask if it's OK to share this information? How can he know there is any confidence to be breached? I'm essentially arguing that this isn't such a clear-cut case as you make it out to be. Since context matters.

parasubvert 13y ago

Says who? Anyone that's ever been involved with technology businesses for 30+ years knows you risk your relationship when you breach confidence. It's common sense. Of course, common sense is rarely common, which is why we have NDAs.

k2xl 13y ago
Have to disagree. If hundreds of people are "invited" it's almost like a mini conference. In fact, the entire issue was that Apple never created a relationship with him in the first place. I totally understand why under those circumstances someone wouldn't assume what was said is confidential.
- anonyfuss 13y ago
  Well, now you know better; unless explicitly told 'you can talk about this', don't talk about it.
msandford 13y ago
Right, but you just assumed the model for life is "confidential unless told otherwise" and I'm saying that assertion doesn't necessarily hold. Your relationship with a secret lover? Yeah, probably. Does that same assumption hold if you're drunk, telling one of your friends (who is also drunk) something at a bar? Probably not. So what we've discovered is that context matters. The folks at Apple treated the negotiation with Derek the same as all the folks at the labels (where secrecy is probably the default and nothing needed to be said). Derek assumed that the people he was talking to understood the nature of his business (much, much different than a big music label) and would tell him if he needed to keep his trap shut. No such words were said and thus, he assumed everything was cool. Was it potentially stupid of him to assume everything was cool? Yeah maybe. But at the same time, why is it his responsibility to think to ask if it's OK to share this information? How can he know there is any confidence to be breached? I'm essentially arguing that this isn't such a clear-cut case as you make it out to be. Since context matters.