Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 19:43:28 -0800 From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> To: "Charles Swiger" <cswiger@mac.com> Cc: freebsd list <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Adaptec AAC raid support Message-ID: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNGENKFAAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> In-Reply-To: <4b92be18094f69f731f15c4872428459@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Charles Swiger wrote: > On Mar 20, 2005, at 2:24 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > [ ... ] >> In that case Dell is a customer of Adaptec, not the other way around, >> so any NDA that Dell might require for Adaptec to sign would not >> have restricted Adaptec's use of it's own programming documentation. > > And you know this, because...? > > You've read that NDA and you know just what it says and what > it covers? Are you really stupid or are you just pretending to be really stupid? Do you even know what an NDA is for? An NDA prevents someone from talking about what are regarded as trade secrets. In the case of Adaptec supplying Dell with controllers, Dell does not have trade secrets that they would be giving to Adaptec. Instead, Adaptec would be the one presenting the 'trade secrets' to Dell in the form of programming info, thus Adaptec would be issuing the NDA to Dell, not the other way around. If you cannot understand this then there's no point in discussing it further with you, as you quite obviously have no idea what an NDA is. Ted
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNGENKFAAA.tedm>