Thomas Lord writes: > Russ Nelson wrote: > > Thomas Lord writes: > > > A trade secret remains a trade secret only as long as no proper > > > disclosure has taken place (and while the secret's owner is taking > > > reasonable steps to protect the secret). So, if *Customer* > > > redistributes the software, he must *also* then release Consultant > > > from the NDA. > > > > Every NDA I've ever signed has had a clause saying "If this > > information becomes public through no fault of your own, you are > > released from this obligation." > > > I'm sorry, I just don't understand how your comment is responsive. Can > you explain? Assuming a sane NDA, the Customer need take no action to release Consultant from the NDA. The act of distribution simultaneously releases the Consultant from the NDA, and so is not a restriction. Essentially, you're arguing that if somebody screws up, that creates trouble for them under the terms of the GPL. WELL DUH! As the doctor said ... "If it hurts when you do that, DON'T DO THAT." If the Consultant distributes code to a Third Party and a Customer with whom he has executed an NDA such that the code is covered by the NDA, the Consultant has screwed up. He should have said "This code is public information and is not covered by the NDA". If he sold the code to the customer under an NDA, he shouldn't have distributed it to a Third Party. Every branch of your concern ends up with "and X screwed up and hurt himself." I don't argue that people don't make mistakes. I argue that you are wrong to say that because X might make a mistake, some other party or agreement should be different. Sorry, we're all adults here. You screw up and hurt yourself, well, it's a learning experience. -- --my blog is at http://blog.russnelson.com | A computer without Python is Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | like a CPU without memory: 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 | it runs, but you can't do Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog | anything useful with it.