<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Learn the Law Before Signing NDAs, Filing Class Actions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/learn-the-law-before-nda-litigation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/learn-the-law-before-nda-litigation/</link>
	<description>Macro Perspective on the Capital Markets, Economy, Geopolitics, Technology, and Digital Media</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 21:38:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: rcogen</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/learn-the-law-before-nda-litigation/comment-page-1/#comment-229206</link>
		<dc:creator>rcogen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 23:14:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=41984#comment-229206</guid>
		<description>Barry, I assume you&#039;re talking about voluntary disclosure in the context of a civil fraud.  Meaning the party under contract can&#039;t call the civil lawyers and spill their guts.  

In a civil case I have never (and I mean never) failed to break an NDA by issuing a subpoena to the party that signed it.  That is compelled disclosure of a sort, but you still get the evidence.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Barry, I assume you&#8217;re talking about voluntary disclosure in the context of a civil fraud.  Meaning the party under contract can&#8217;t call the civil lawyers and spill their guts.  </p>
<p>In a civil case I have never (and I mean never) failed to break an NDA by issuing a subpoena to the party that signed it.  That is compelled disclosure of a sort, but you still get the evidence.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: redtox</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/learn-the-law-before-nda-litigation/comment-page-1/#comment-228968</link>
		<dc:creator>redtox</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 01:06:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=41984#comment-228968</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m sorry Barry, but you are wrong about the law.  He can be compelled to disclose in a civil fraud trial.  It&#039;s not even a hard case.  In our legal system, uncovering fraud is more important than some bullshit NDA or your politically motivated, wall street journal style &quot;private contract&quot; baloney.  How can you claim to know who is a &quot;really smart class action lawyer&quot; and who is a &quot;whore&quot; when you have no idea what the law is?

~~~

&lt;strong&gt;BR&lt;/strong&gt;: What is a &quot;Civil Fraud&quot; trial? 

If it is a civil action between two (non-governmental) parties, there is no compulsion. The NDA means you are not allowed to tell private parties the info, and the penalty is repayment of the severance package (AKA hush money).

If it is a criminal trial, or testimony to Congress, or any governmental action (i.e., SEC prosecution), than the NDA is not applicable.  A non-criminal civil prosecution by a regulatory agency is also included, and the NDA won&#039;t apply.

I hope this clarifies this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m sorry Barry, but you are wrong about the law.  He can be compelled to disclose in a civil fraud trial.  It&#8217;s not even a hard case.  In our legal system, uncovering fraud is more important than some bullshit NDA or your politically motivated, wall street journal style &#8220;private contract&#8221; baloney.  How can you claim to know who is a &#8220;really smart class action lawyer&#8221; and who is a &#8220;whore&#8221; when you have no idea what the law is?</p>
<p>~~~</p>
<p><strong>BR</strong>: What is a &#8220;Civil Fraud&#8221; trial? </p>
<p>If it is a civil action between two (non-governmental) parties, there is no compulsion. The NDA means you are not allowed to tell private parties the info, and the penalty is repayment of the severance package (AKA hush money).</p>
<p>If it is a criminal trial, or testimony to Congress, or any governmental action (i.e., SEC prosecution), than the NDA is not applicable.  A non-criminal civil prosecution by a regulatory agency is also included, and the NDA won&#8217;t apply.</p>
<p>I hope this clarifies this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ponchovilla</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/learn-the-law-before-nda-litigation/comment-page-1/#comment-228959</link>
		<dc:creator>Ponchovilla</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:48:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=41984#comment-228959</guid>
		<description>And this is different from buying or renting a Congressman? Requires a black AMEX card.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And this is different from buying or renting a Congressman? Requires a black AMEX card.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: danm</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/learn-the-law-before-nda-litigation/comment-page-1/#comment-228949</link>
		<dc:creator>danm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:04:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=41984#comment-228949</guid>
		<description>Bravo, Barry, for supporting rule of law.
------------
Anyone who knows the rule of law will know that it was initially created for the &quot;haves&quot; to make sure the proles paid they dues.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bravo, Barry, for supporting rule of law.<br />
&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<br />
Anyone who knows the rule of law will know that it was initially created for the &#8220;haves&#8221; to make sure the proles paid they dues.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: danm</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/learn-the-law-before-nda-litigation/comment-page-1/#comment-228945</link>
		<dc:creator>danm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 23:56:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=41984#comment-228945</guid>
		<description>NOT taking the money when you really need it, is bravery, and makes you a hero.
-----------------
Barry,

You are right but I think in many cases you are holding everyone else to higher standards than you are of yourself.

For example, I could argue that your trading is like stealing from the unknowing.  Your overweight in equities for short term outperformance when you think the underlying economy/stocks are crap is not very ehtical and/or moral.

You are part of the problem just like most of us are part of the problem.  That&#039;s what soceity is all about.  It always takes 2 to tango.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT taking the money when you really need it, is bravery, and makes you a hero.<br />
&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;<br />
Barry,</p>
<p>You are right but I think in many cases you are holding everyone else to higher standards than you are of yourself.</p>
<p>For example, I could argue that your trading is like stealing from the unknowing.  Your overweight in equities for short term outperformance when you think the underlying economy/stocks are crap is not very ehtical and/or moral.</p>
<p>You are part of the problem just like most of us are part of the problem.  That&#8217;s what soceity is all about.  It always takes 2 to tango.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: danm</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/learn-the-law-before-nda-litigation/comment-page-1/#comment-228931</link>
		<dc:creator>danm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 23:00:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=41984#comment-228931</guid>
		<description>I think you should cut them some slack just like you&#039;re willing to cut some slack to the bonus reapers.

Obviously many at the time did not know much that was very incriminating because it would have been worth way more than 50K.  Some might be that stupid but not most.

I think a NDA is pretty standard when you get the axe and I don&#039;t understand why, if someone was pink  slipped because of non-production or non team playing (maybe because they had ethics) they should have to, on top of losing their job, walk out penniless for not signing the NDA.

And try getting a job once you&#039;re blacklisted.  There are ethics and there are lepers colonies.  Give us a break Barry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you should cut them some slack just like you&#8217;re willing to cut some slack to the bonus reapers.</p>
<p>Obviously many at the time did not know much that was very incriminating because it would have been worth way more than 50K.  Some might be that stupid but not most.</p>
<p>I think a NDA is pretty standard when you get the axe and I don&#8217;t understand why, if someone was pink  slipped because of non-production or non team playing (maybe because they had ethics) they should have to, on top of losing their job, walk out penniless for not signing the NDA.</p>
<p>And try getting a job once you&#8217;re blacklisted.  There are ethics and there are lepers colonies.  Give us a break Barry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry Ritholtz</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/learn-the-law-before-nda-litigation/comment-page-1/#comment-228930</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry Ritholtz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 22:49:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=41984#comment-228930</guid>
		<description>Mike

Boy do you have the wrong guy. 

I grew up lower middle class, my fathers business went belly up -- first when his boss died and the firm closed, 
then when he opened his own shop, and later in the 1970s recession when it closed. 
We just scraped by. 

I paid for undergraduate (State school, accepted elsewhere) and grad school myself , and was in deep debt for many years.  There were many opportunities along the way to do the wrong thing for a quick buck -- but I passed. 

Aside from the fact i doubt these folks took the hush money cause there kids were starving --

I dont doubt that many of these people have needs, but if you take the cash, well then don&#039;t complain you feel dirty -- YOU ARE DIRTY! 

Thats the whole point! --</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike</p>
<p>Boy do you have the wrong guy. </p>
<p>I grew up lower middle class, my fathers business went belly up &#8212; first when his boss died and the firm closed,<br />
then when he opened his own shop, and later in the 1970s recession when it closed.<br />
We just scraped by. </p>
<p>I paid for undergraduate (State school, accepted elsewhere) and grad school myself , and was in deep debt for many years.  There were many opportunities along the way to do the wrong thing for a quick buck &#8212; but I passed. </p>
<p>Aside from the fact i doubt these folks took the hush money cause there kids were starving &#8211;</p>
<p>I dont doubt that many of these people have needs, but if you take the cash, well then don&#8217;t complain you feel dirty &#8212; YOU ARE DIRTY! </p>
<p>Thats the whole point! &#8211;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: michael</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/learn-the-law-before-nda-litigation/comment-page-1/#comment-228929</link>
		<dc:creator>michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 22:48:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=41984#comment-228929</guid>
		<description>not taking the money when you really really need it to put food on your kid&#039;s table and keep a roof over his head is out of the question.

i agree with you in theory and that theory may seem ironclad when you&#039;re in NYC and flush with cash.  but a good theory and 50¢ will leave you borrowing a buck from a friend to buy a cup of cheap coffee.  there are two economies in this country.  there is the one you know and are embroiled in and then there is the one for the rest of us ... those who don&#039;t do turns on CNBS or MSBNC.  

not trying to beat up on you ... i just really don&#039;t think you get it.  your prostitute analogy is a really good one.  our gov&#039;t has been bought and paid for.  thats created a vast working class of whores and wage slaves who don&#039;t aspire to run the world or be masters of the universe.  we just want our son&#039;s and daughter&#039;s to be able to sleep comfortably in their beds without an empty belly.  most of us will swallow a lot of pride to achieve that goal.  and thats the world between the coasts.  present company not excepted of course.

its one thing for me to suck it up and do without in order to take a stand for my principles.  its another thing entirely to impose that shortcoming on my family.  its a shame our gov&#039;t doesn&#039;t have that perspective ... for right now we&#039;re doing exactly that.  we&#039;re fattening up a bunch of greedy undeserving banksters and we&#039;re stealing it from our kids, grandkids and great-grandkids.  imagine a world where blackmail is a crime.



PS ... caught you with dylan ratigan this morning.  you made some good points.  very well stated.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>not taking the money when you really really need it to put food on your kid&#8217;s table and keep a roof over his head is out of the question.</p>
<p>i agree with you in theory and that theory may seem ironclad when you&#8217;re in NYC and flush with cash.  but a good theory and 50¢ will leave you borrowing a buck from a friend to buy a cup of cheap coffee.  there are two economies in this country.  there is the one you know and are embroiled in and then there is the one for the rest of us &#8230; those who don&#8217;t do turns on CNBS or MSBNC.  </p>
<p>not trying to beat up on you &#8230; i just really don&#8217;t think you get it.  your prostitute analogy is a really good one.  our gov&#8217;t has been bought and paid for.  thats created a vast working class of whores and wage slaves who don&#8217;t aspire to run the world or be masters of the universe.  we just want our son&#8217;s and daughter&#8217;s to be able to sleep comfortably in their beds without an empty belly.  most of us will swallow a lot of pride to achieve that goal.  and thats the world between the coasts.  present company not excepted of course.</p>
<p>its one thing for me to suck it up and do without in order to take a stand for my principles.  its another thing entirely to impose that shortcoming on my family.  its a shame our gov&#8217;t doesn&#8217;t have that perspective &#8230; for right now we&#8217;re doing exactly that.  we&#8217;re fattening up a bunch of greedy undeserving banksters and we&#8217;re stealing it from our kids, grandkids and great-grandkids.  imagine a world where blackmail is a crime.</p>
<p>PS &#8230; caught you with dylan ratigan this morning.  you made some good points.  very well stated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry Ritholtz</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/learn-the-law-before-nda-litigation/comment-page-1/#comment-228928</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry Ritholtz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 22:48:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=41984#comment-228928</guid>
		<description>michael 

NOT taking the money when you really need it, is bravery, and makes you a hero.
That is the harder thing to do. Very few would turn it down.

People who do bad things -- because they need the money -- does not excuse the behavior. 
Taking the hush money, no matter how badly you need it, still means that you are not a hero.

Prostitutes don&#039;t want to have sex with strangers, they need the money.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>michael </p>
<p>NOT taking the money when you really need it, is bravery, and makes you a hero.<br />
That is the harder thing to do. Very few would turn it down.</p>
<p>People who do bad things &#8212; because they need the money &#8212; does not excuse the behavior.<br />
Taking the hush money, no matter how badly you need it, still means that you are not a hero.</p>
<p>Prostitutes don&#8217;t want to have sex with strangers, they need the money.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: michael</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/learn-the-law-before-nda-litigation/comment-page-1/#comment-228926</link>
		<dc:creator>michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 22:47:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=41984#comment-228926</guid>
		<description>there are times, sir, when you are exactly right.  there are other times, like now, when you can&#039;t see the forest for the trees.  

regarding NDAs, there are certainly a lot of people in the situation you describe.  they take the hush money.  but there are many many more who take the hush money because they have little or no choice.   they&#039;re loosing their job, their income, and NEED that severance package to put food on the table and service their debt. 

its blackmail ... plain and simple.  and it works really really well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>there are times, sir, when you are exactly right.  there are other times, like now, when you can&#8217;t see the forest for the trees.  </p>
<p>regarding NDAs, there are certainly a lot of people in the situation you describe.  they take the hush money.  but there are many many more who take the hush money because they have little or no choice.   they&#8217;re loosing their job, their income, and NEED that severance package to put food on the table and service their debt. </p>
<p>its blackmail &#8230; plain and simple.  and it works really really well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

