I've recently run into something that I'd like a little advice on. Yesterday I found a listing for a developer looking for a team to create a game, including a composer, but would not release any information at all about the game. I emailed him asking for more information and sent him my portfolio. He replied stating that he would not release any info about the game at all until I signed a non disclosure agreement. I didn't mind that, so after reading the 5 page document I filled it out and signed it, giving only my city and state for my address. I am very careful about who I give my personal information to, especially my address, and am not willing to simply hand it out unless I know I can trust said person. Anyway, the agreement was kicked back to me with the developer stating he needs my full address for legal reasons.
I understand the importance of non disclosure, but I wanted to ask if it's standard practice in game development for all parties to sign an agreement such as this before any information at all is released.
Non Disclosure Agreement
Hello,
Handing out NDAs even before signing any contract is pretty common and the developer is right asking for your full address as long as they provide their address as well.
If you did break the NDA, the developer would need your full address to have their lawyers send you nasty mail. ;)
And why are you so cautious giving out your address if you're running a business? Who will you trust if not potential employers? I even have mine in my mail signature - it's not like anyone's going to rob me now that they know where I live or where my business resides.
Actually: In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, posting your full address on your website is even legally mandatory if it's connected to any business venture, for liability reasons.
This is called "Impressum" or "Imprint" and it does make a lot of sense when you think about it.
Cheers,
Moritz
Handing out NDAs even before signing any contract is pretty common and the developer is right asking for your full address as long as they provide their address as well.
If you did break the NDA, the developer would need your full address to have their lawyers send you nasty mail. ;)
And why are you so cautious giving out your address if you're running a business? Who will you trust if not potential employers? I even have mine in my mail signature - it's not like anyone's going to rob me now that they know where I live or where my business resides.
Actually: In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, posting your full address on your website is even legally mandatory if it's connected to any business venture, for liability reasons.
This is called "Impressum" or "Imprint" and it does make a lot of sense when you think about it.
Cheers,
Moritz
What Moritz said. It's because the client needs to be able to serve you papers if you ever broke the NDA or any other contract you had with him. You cannot serve a PO box, for example, so on all of my contracts I have my clients list their full address, no PO boxes accepted, and I provide mine as well. You should also take note of any localization clauses. For example I have a contract that states if any legal issues should pop up then the state of California's laws and policies regarding such matters would be followed, regardless that I'm not in that state.
Hello,
I cannot speak from experience on whether or not this is common in indie development (though I'd say about 1 out of 4 in the hobbyist classifieds require an nda to be signed). If you're willing to sign one, you'll also have to give your address (after all, it's most likely possible to get that anyway, no matter how cautious you are).
However, I'd really think about whether you want to work with that specific team, even if you have to agree to their conditions. While NDAs are fully understandable in the AAA-industry, where marketing is timed to the minute, to the actual gamedevelopment and especially to indie-dev it's highly damaging and there'll be more and more projects requiring ndas as long as it's possible to find members under such conditions.
As you can probably tell, I'm quite biased on this topic so I'll stop now; however, feel free to ask me anything if you'd like to discuss this further.
bw,
Tobl
I cannot speak from experience on whether or not this is common in indie development (though I'd say about 1 out of 4 in the hobbyist classifieds require an nda to be signed). If you're willing to sign one, you'll also have to give your address (after all, it's most likely possible to get that anyway, no matter how cautious you are).
However, I'd really think about whether you want to work with that specific team, even if you have to agree to their conditions. While NDAs are fully understandable in the AAA-industry, where marketing is timed to the minute, to the actual gamedevelopment and especially to indie-dev it's highly damaging and there'll be more and more projects requiring ndas as long as it's possible to find members under such conditions.
As you can probably tell, I'm quite biased on this topic so I'll stop now; however, feel free to ask me anything if you'd like to discuss this further.
bw,
Tobl
However, I'd really think about whether you want to work with that specific team, even if you have to agree to their conditions. While NDAs are fully understandable in the AAA-industry, where marketing is timed to the minute, to the actual gamedevelopment and especially to indie-dev it's highly damaging and there'll be more and more projects requiring ndas as long as it's possible to find members under such conditions.
Okay, I'll bite. ;)
What do you think is harmful about it? I like reading devlogs and I think keeping your production process open to the public can be helpful depending on your marketing strategy (crowdfunding etc.), no doubt about that!
But having some secrecy going on and making sure that everyone keeps it this way can work out just as well if done right, both for indies as well as "AAA" productions. And some people like to protect their ideas and process from being copied, which is understandable. And what's harming the game development process there, except maybe a lack of creative exchange with other developers and the fanbase (if any)?
Cheers,
Moritz
Author
Well...I guess the best way to put my feelings right now is that I really need to get out of hobby mode and into business mode. This is been on my mind the past few days and has been brought on by comments I've seen on this board. But now I do see that I need to take a time out and really set myself up, write a business plan, take my website from blog style to professional, and really start treating this as a business. Really, one of the biggest reasons why I was so hesitant to disclose personal information to this developer is I have no idea what kind of work he's done in the past, or even if has has done anything. I don't know if he's a serious developer of some guy with an idea, though he did mention payment in the posting. But, as you said, if I truly am running a business then that business address is public knowledge.
Once again, thanks for the advice. Looks like I've got some work to do on setting up my business.
Once again, thanks for the advice. Looks like I've got some work to do on setting up my business.
Hello,
@ Bakuda: I'm sorry for taking this a little offtopic.[s] I will move this to a new topic if the discussion should grow any further, but please bear with me for the moment.[/s]
I will start with the less radical part of how NDAs hardly give you any advantage:
- First of all, nobody forces you to make all your content public. Just say "hey, I'm making this <short description> game, contact me if you're interested", you don't need an nda to do that.
- Of course the nda is mainly about that person then revealing all of the content. Fortunately, our brains are quite capable of evaluating whom we can trust. If the other one is someone trustworthy, you can simply ask them to please not reveal anything and they most likely won't. If on the other hand the other one is someone out to screw you, they will do so with or without an nda, there's always a way.
- The above is even more true considering that an nda is nothing but a piece of paper with a little bit of ink applied if you're not willing or able to enforce it. If someone actually breaks the nda, it will cost time, energy and money to actually hold them accountable for that. Even if you are willing to move time and energy from the gamedevelopment to the courtroom, being an indie-team, you most likely won't have the funding to pay a lawyer.
- "But what if someone steals my idea?". That is certainly the most-asked question in this context. And even though it's been said countless times, let's repeat once again: ideas are cheap. They're a dime a dozen and anyone working in gamedevelopment has more ideas in their head than they'll ever be able to produce. What makes a good game is the execution, not the initial idea. The only reason someone in indie would prefer to steal your idea instead of working together or making one of his own, is that they don't have any. But if that is the case, they'll hardly be capable of making that idea into a game any better or faster than you.
- The other main reason for NDAs is marketing. The trick with mystery-marketing however is that, while no one knows what the answer is, everyone knows that there is a 'mystery' (in this case, the content). The big industry can pull that off pretty easily, they can just push content into the media until everybody is sure to have heard about that at some point. Indie teams on the other hand do not have the budget for that and mainly rely on word of mouth advertisement, and it's just really hard to get people to say "I've seen this cool upcoming game. I've never heard of the guys who make it and I don't really know what it's about, but you should definitely check it out." Maybe there are examples where it worked and it would be great to hear of them, but most of the time, indie-gaming is still too small and at least I wouldn't know of any cases where that really worked on a large scale.
Now for the real deal, why is it actually bad for development:
- Methods and standards have evolved in game design and continue to do so, but in it's core, it is a creative process. And like any creative process, it relies heavily on the dynamic within the team and the motivation of the individual members (even if money keeps them working, motivation is what produces quality). NDAs damage these dynamics by introducing yourself with two basic premises: Even though you might make a 180°-turn from outside the team to inside, the very first connection between the team members on which anything else is built will be distrust. Secondly, even before the new guy is joining, you define an unhealthy hierarchy: You are the boss and you alone decide the rules under which one might work with you. While I certainly don't say there shouldn't be any hierarchy at all, the role of the team leader should be a supporting one, not the bad boss that want's to control everything.
- While there might not be many that are higly opposed against ndas in indie-teams, the simple fact that they have to make quite an effort to only view the most basic content of the game and thus even consider joining the project is a huge inconvenience for many people when looking for a team. The result is that quite a few of them simply won't and stick with a project that tell's them what they're up to from the beginning instead, resulting in fewer that are even contacting you. Those that do contact you are then likely to contact the other teams with ndas as well, resulting in them having lot's of options which project to join. All in all, it will result in you having a much harder time finding members than you would have had otherwise.
- As Katz already said, this will also take away the exchange with other developers and the community. While many might do well enough without input from other developers, a quick glance at the gamedesign forum shows that most of the people that ask for advice there get tons of ideas they wouldn't have ever thought about on their own. Even more important might be that this doesn't apply to design-questions only, but also to tech-questions. So especially if someone on the team is inexperienced or trying out something new, they won't be able to ask "I'm trying to <do this>, how do I accomplish that?", making work much harder for them and lowering the quality of the product.
- Finally, a game idea evolves and changes heavily during production. While it's always good to have a design document, an nda requires you to have a very detailed one so that as many of your ideas as possible are covered by the nda, and then reinforces the notion that those ideas are "worth protecting". This leads to a very static design process, where many deferring roads remain unexplored and lots of potential goes unused.
TL;DR: Lot's of reasons why one person believes that NDAs are bad for indie teams.
[s]If you think this topic is worth further discussion, please send me a pm and I'll port what we have now to a new topic in order to avoid spamming this thread.[/s]
bw,
Tobl
@ Bakuda: I'm sorry for taking this a little offtopic.[s] I will move this to a new topic if the discussion should grow any further, but please bear with me for the moment.[/s]
I will start with the less radical part of how NDAs hardly give you any advantage:
- First of all, nobody forces you to make all your content public. Just say "hey, I'm making this <short description> game, contact me if you're interested", you don't need an nda to do that.
- Of course the nda is mainly about that person then revealing all of the content. Fortunately, our brains are quite capable of evaluating whom we can trust. If the other one is someone trustworthy, you can simply ask them to please not reveal anything and they most likely won't. If on the other hand the other one is someone out to screw you, they will do so with or without an nda, there's always a way.
- The above is even more true considering that an nda is nothing but a piece of paper with a little bit of ink applied if you're not willing or able to enforce it. If someone actually breaks the nda, it will cost time, energy and money to actually hold them accountable for that. Even if you are willing to move time and energy from the gamedevelopment to the courtroom, being an indie-team, you most likely won't have the funding to pay a lawyer.
- "But what if someone steals my idea?". That is certainly the most-asked question in this context. And even though it's been said countless times, let's repeat once again: ideas are cheap. They're a dime a dozen and anyone working in gamedevelopment has more ideas in their head than they'll ever be able to produce. What makes a good game is the execution, not the initial idea. The only reason someone in indie would prefer to steal your idea instead of working together or making one of his own, is that they don't have any. But if that is the case, they'll hardly be capable of making that idea into a game any better or faster than you.
- The other main reason for NDAs is marketing. The trick with mystery-marketing however is that, while no one knows what the answer is, everyone knows that there is a 'mystery' (in this case, the content). The big industry can pull that off pretty easily, they can just push content into the media until everybody is sure to have heard about that at some point. Indie teams on the other hand do not have the budget for that and mainly rely on word of mouth advertisement, and it's just really hard to get people to say "I've seen this cool upcoming game. I've never heard of the guys who make it and I don't really know what it's about, but you should definitely check it out." Maybe there are examples where it worked and it would be great to hear of them, but most of the time, indie-gaming is still too small and at least I wouldn't know of any cases where that really worked on a large scale.
Now for the real deal, why is it actually bad for development:
- Methods and standards have evolved in game design and continue to do so, but in it's core, it is a creative process. And like any creative process, it relies heavily on the dynamic within the team and the motivation of the individual members (even if money keeps them working, motivation is what produces quality). NDAs damage these dynamics by introducing yourself with two basic premises: Even though you might make a 180°-turn from outside the team to inside, the very first connection between the team members on which anything else is built will be distrust. Secondly, even before the new guy is joining, you define an unhealthy hierarchy: You are the boss and you alone decide the rules under which one might work with you. While I certainly don't say there shouldn't be any hierarchy at all, the role of the team leader should be a supporting one, not the bad boss that want's to control everything.
- While there might not be many that are higly opposed against ndas in indie-teams, the simple fact that they have to make quite an effort to only view the most basic content of the game and thus even consider joining the project is a huge inconvenience for many people when looking for a team. The result is that quite a few of them simply won't and stick with a project that tell's them what they're up to from the beginning instead, resulting in fewer that are even contacting you. Those that do contact you are then likely to contact the other teams with ndas as well, resulting in them having lot's of options which project to join. All in all, it will result in you having a much harder time finding members than you would have had otherwise.
- As Katz already said, this will also take away the exchange with other developers and the community. While many might do well enough without input from other developers, a quick glance at the gamedesign forum shows that most of the people that ask for advice there get tons of ideas they wouldn't have ever thought about on their own. Even more important might be that this doesn't apply to design-questions only, but also to tech-questions. So especially if someone on the team is inexperienced or trying out something new, they won't be able to ask "I'm trying to <do this>, how do I accomplish that?", making work much harder for them and lowering the quality of the product.
- Finally, a game idea evolves and changes heavily during production. While it's always good to have a design document, an nda requires you to have a very detailed one so that as many of your ideas as possible are covered by the nda, and then reinforces the notion that those ideas are "worth protecting". This leads to a very static design process, where many deferring roads remain unexplored and lots of potential goes unused.
TL;DR: Lot's of reasons why one person believes that NDAs are bad for indie teams.
[s]If you think this topic is worth further discussion, please send me a pm and I'll port what we have now to a new topic in order to avoid spamming this thread.[/s]
bw,
Tobl
[quote name='Tobl' timestamp='1351628203' post='4995556']
However, I'd really think about whether you want to work with that specific team, even if you have to agree to their conditions. While NDAs are fully understandable in the AAA-industry, where marketing is timed to the minute, to the actual gamedevelopment and especially to indie-dev it's highly damaging and there'll be more and more projects requiring ndas as long as it's possible to find members under such conditions.
Okay, I'll bite. ;)
What do you think is harmful about it? I like reading devlogs and I think keeping your production process open to the public can be helpful depending on your marketing strategy (crowdfunding etc.), no doubt about that!
But having some secrecy going on and making sure that everyone keeps it this way can work out just as well if done right, both for indies as well as "AAA" productions. And some people like to protect their ideas and process from being copied, which is understandable. And what's harming the game development process there, except maybe a lack of creative exchange with other developers and the fanbase (if any)?
Cheers,
Moritz
[/quote]
The problem with a NDA is, that it is only a one-way contract. It protects the right of them, but it will hinder my future decisions. If I sign a NDA and got information about an idea I got myself, I will be hindered to use this idea in future projects. Signing many NDAs would be like killing off most of my creative decisions, even worse if I do not really know if any of the last X projects I worked on used this idea or not.
Therefore I would never sign a NDA for smaller projects or indie teams.
Guys - I don't mind this discussion as it's still on topic. So no worries about being off topic, because you're not. 
Agreed. Too often teams/managers get excited or to eager to fill out documents instead of taking time to evaluate potential audio vendors with vague info. The initial evaluation should be focused on if my audio content/talents fit your needs, am I available and do the numbers work out for both parties. More specific, sensitive info can be shared later, once a vendor is selected and on board.
Hmmm, not so much. Without an NDA it makes it harder to show a clear case of violating trust. For example if I over hear someone in a public place talking about a cool game project and I blog about this new, neat idea - have I violated that person's trust? I say no because the discussion was held in public, without any documentation and no shared expectation of privacy. Just asking someone to keep a secret often doesn't pan out and is poor business.
Could be but just because funds or available interest/time may be low, are you actually advocating indie projects simply ignore the common business practices and standards? That hardly seems appropriate. I agree with your first point regarding the timing but I disagree with your later points.
True, implementation is what maters but surely even you can agree having all of the legal documents in hand can make it much easier to prove malice/copying/cheating happened. Also the stronger the case, the easier it is to settle and not end up going to court in the first place. I'm not a lawyer but I've heard the amount/type of damages that can be sought change with what kind of documentation and set up is in place.
Wrong. An NDA is a mutually binding agreement where we can evaluate and "audition" each other. For example the NDAs that I sign state that I'll not release sensitive info on the company and it's project and they'll not release my info such as rates, test pieces I may have provided or other nonpublic materials I provided so they could help evalute me. Every NDA I've signed remained private and I never once say the company use my NDA as marketing. In fact for months and months no public discussion whatsoever took place. It wasn't until the project reached a certain maturity that marketing started putting out teasers and such - and that was related to marketing and PR not NDAs.
Interesting take but, again, I find fault with your logic. First off ANY job requires you agree not to share company secrets. This applies to jobs in and outside of the game dev industry. Secondly every single job I've taken on had a boss. Zero jobs have hired me on without at least one person to report to, who holds me accountable. Also having a clear hierarchy can help creativity instead of hurting it. I've been on teams where there wasn't a defined vision and there was weak leadership. That project ended up missing deadlines, lacked a coherent vision and morale fell drastically. This didn't help creativity, it hinder and blocked it. Folks often do best when there is a clear vision, a defined leader (or leaders) and a set standard.
I've never experienced this as both and employee or a freelancer.
There are many interviews, articles and guides (often as post mortems) that show the good, bad and ugly behind a project's development. The only trick is they're often after the game is out... which makes sense because during development the team is too busy and still figuring stuff out. Also there are many ways to discuss problems and their solutions without violating NDA. I do it all of the time on here. It could just be me but I do not find NDAs a hinderence or harmful factor to the industry. In fact, I would encourage more people to behave like professionals so we have fewer clients expeceting free-yet-Hollywood-quality audio for their games. It would also help deter people stealing audio work or flaking out on their committments to the folks they hire for their indie projects.
I'm not sure what NDAs you're signing or talking about but every NDA I've signed had a blacket clause that covered project X as well as a time frame. That allowed the game (and it's design) to change as needed.
Thanks!
Nate
First of all, nobody forces you to make all your content public. Just say "hey, I'm making this <short description> game, contact me if you're interested", you don't need an nda to do that.
Agreed. Too often teams/managers get excited or to eager to fill out documents instead of taking time to evaluate potential audio vendors with vague info. The initial evaluation should be focused on if my audio content/talents fit your needs, am I available and do the numbers work out for both parties. More specific, sensitive info can be shared later, once a vendor is selected and on board.
- Of course the nda is mainly about that person then revealing all of the content. Fortunately, our brains are quite capable of evaluating whom we can trust. If the other one is someone trustworthy, you can simply ask them to please not reveal anything and they most likely won't. If on the other hand the other one is someone out to screw you, they will do so with or without an nda, there's always a way.
Hmmm, not so much. Without an NDA it makes it harder to show a clear case of violating trust. For example if I over hear someone in a public place talking about a cool game project and I blog about this new, neat idea - have I violated that person's trust? I say no because the discussion was held in public, without any documentation and no shared expectation of privacy. Just asking someone to keep a secret often doesn't pan out and is poor business.
- The above is even more true considering that an nda is nothing but a piece of paper with a little bit of ink applied if you're not willing or able to enforce it. If someone actually breaks the nda, it will cost time, energy and money to actually hold them accountable for that. Even if you are willing to move time and energy from the gamedevelopment to the courtroom, being an indie-team, you most likely won't have the funding to pay a lawyer.
Could be but just because funds or available interest/time may be low, are you actually advocating indie projects simply ignore the common business practices and standards? That hardly seems appropriate. I agree with your first point regarding the timing but I disagree with your later points.
- "But what if someone steals my idea?". That is certainly the most-asked question in this context. And even though it's been said countless times, let's repeat once again: ideas are cheap. They're a dime a dozen and anyone working in gamedevelopment has more ideas in their head than they'll ever be able to produce. What makes a good game is the execution, not the initial idea. The only reason someone in indie would prefer to steal your idea instead of working together or making one of his own, is that they don't have any. But if that is the case, they'll hardly be capable of making that idea into a game any better or faster than you.
True, implementation is what maters but surely even you can agree having all of the legal documents in hand can make it much easier to prove malice/copying/cheating happened. Also the stronger the case, the easier it is to settle and not end up going to court in the first place. I'm not a lawyer but I've heard the amount/type of damages that can be sought change with what kind of documentation and set up is in place.
- The other main reason for NDAs is marketing. The trick with mystery-marketing however is that, while no one knows what the answer is, everyone knows that there is a 'mystery' (in this case, the content). The big industry can pull that off pretty easily, they can just push content into the media until everybody is sure to have heard about that at some point. Indie teams on the other hand do not have the budget for that and mainly rely on word of mouth advertisement, and it's just really hard to get people to say "I've seen this cool upcoming game. I've never heard of the guys who make it and I don't really know what it's about, but you should definitely check it out." Maybe there are examples where it worked and it would be great to hear of them, but most of the time, indie-gaming is still too small and at least I wouldn't know of any cases where that really worked on a large scale.
Wrong. An NDA is a mutually binding agreement where we can evaluate and "audition" each other. For example the NDAs that I sign state that I'll not release sensitive info on the company and it's project and they'll not release my info such as rates, test pieces I may have provided or other nonpublic materials I provided so they could help evalute me. Every NDA I've signed remained private and I never once say the company use my NDA as marketing. In fact for months and months no public discussion whatsoever took place. It wasn't until the project reached a certain maturity that marketing started putting out teasers and such - and that was related to marketing and PR not NDAs.
- Methods and standards have evolved in game design and continue to do so, but in it's core, it is a creative process. And like any creative process, it relies heavily on the dynamic within the team and the motivation of the individual members (even if money keeps them working, motivation is what produces quality). NDAs damage these dynamics by introducing yourself with two basic premises: Even though you might make a 180°-turn from outside the team to inside, the very first connection between the team members on which anything else is built will be distrust. Secondly, even before the new guy is joining, you define an unhealthy hierarchy: You are the boss and you alone decide the rules under which one might work with you. While I certainly don't say there shouldn't be any hierarchy at all, the role of the team leader should be a supporting one, not the bad boss that want's to control everything.
Interesting take but, again, I find fault with your logic. First off ANY job requires you agree not to share company secrets. This applies to jobs in and outside of the game dev industry. Secondly every single job I've taken on had a boss. Zero jobs have hired me on without at least one person to report to, who holds me accountable. Also having a clear hierarchy can help creativity instead of hurting it. I've been on teams where there wasn't a defined vision and there was weak leadership. That project ended up missing deadlines, lacked a coherent vision and morale fell drastically. This didn't help creativity, it hinder and blocked it. Folks often do best when there is a clear vision, a defined leader (or leaders) and a set standard.
While there might not be many that are higly opposed against ndas in indie-teams, the simple fact that they have to make quite an effort to only view the most basic content of the game and thus even consider joining the project is a huge inconvenience for many people when looking for a team. The result is that quite a few of them simply won't and stick with a project that tell's them what they're up to from the beginning instead, resulting in fewer that are even contacting you. Those that do contact you are then likely to contact the other teams with ndas as well, resulting in them having lot's of options which project to join. All in all, it will result in you having a much harder time finding members than you would have had otherwise.
I've never experienced this as both and employee or a freelancer.
- As Katz already said, this will also take away the exchange with other developers and the community. While many might do well enough without input from other developers, a quick glance at the gamedesign forum shows that most of the people that ask for advice there get tons of ideas they wouldn't have ever thought about on their own. Even more important might be that this doesn't apply to design-questions only, but also to tech-questions. So especially if someone on the team is inexperienced or trying out something new, they won't be able to ask "I'm trying to <do this>, how do I accomplish that?", making work much harder for them and lowering the quality of the product.
There are many interviews, articles and guides (often as post mortems) that show the good, bad and ugly behind a project's development. The only trick is they're often after the game is out... which makes sense because during development the team is too busy and still figuring stuff out. Also there are many ways to discuss problems and their solutions without violating NDA. I do it all of the time on here. It could just be me but I do not find NDAs a hinderence or harmful factor to the industry. In fact, I would encourage more people to behave like professionals so we have fewer clients expeceting free-yet-Hollywood-quality audio for their games. It would also help deter people stealing audio work or flaking out on their committments to the folks they hire for their indie projects.
- Finally, a game idea evolves and changes heavily during production. While it's always good to have a design document, an nda requires you to have a very detailed one so that as many of your ideas as possible are covered by the nda, and then reinforces the notion that those ideas are "worth protecting". This leads to a very static design process, where many deferring roads remain unexplored and lots of potential goes unused.
I'm not sure what NDAs you're signing or talking about but every NDA I've signed had a blacket clause that covered project X as well as a time frame. That allowed the game (and it's design) to change as needed.
Thanks!
Nate
+10 on Nate's comments (except one of them ;))...
In general, I give a kudos to an indy team who has enough of their act together to require an NDA.
A couple add-on points.
Insist on a bi-directional NDA. That protects both of you (and it can keep the would-be employer from doing things like telling a competitor of yours how much you charge).
Faithfully adhere to your NDA. That should go without saying.
Remember. Even if you hear somewhere (blog, conference, etc.) say something that was disclosed to you under NDA, it does NOT mean that it's ok for you to talk about it. Unless the information was formally made public by the company, it's not necessarily "public information.' A great example is that some blog posts about a rumored game, FooBar. If the blogger contacts you and says "I heard you're working on FooBar-- how is it? Is it still on track to come out on December 26? I've heard it's a great turn-based, platformer with grenade throwing ponies," for you to talk at all about the game is probably violating your NDA. "Rumors" is not "Disclosure".
Make sure there aren't any weird 'gotchas' in the NDA. FOr example, I have seen NDA's require that any disclosed information be specified in writing within 24 hours of the disclosure.
In general, I give a kudos to an indy team who has enough of their act together to require an NDA.
A couple add-on points.
Insist on a bi-directional NDA. That protects both of you (and it can keep the would-be employer from doing things like telling a competitor of yours how much you charge).
Faithfully adhere to your NDA. That should go without saying.
Remember. Even if you hear somewhere (blog, conference, etc.) say something that was disclosed to you under NDA, it does NOT mean that it's ok for you to talk about it. Unless the information was formally made public by the company, it's not necessarily "public information.' A great example is that some blog posts about a rumored game, FooBar. If the blogger contacts you and says "I heard you're working on FooBar-- how is it? Is it still on track to come out on December 26? I've heard it's a great turn-based, platformer with grenade throwing ponies," for you to talk at all about the game is probably violating your NDA. "Rumors" is not "Disclosure".
Make sure there aren't any weird 'gotchas' in the NDA. FOr example, I have seen NDA's require that any disclosed information be specified in writing within 24 hours of the disclosure.
The other main reason for NDAs is marketing[/quote]
That definitely is true. Keeping things under NDA lets the company market the game according to their needs and timing. If they don't want to announce their game until a certain date, then they have that right-- you can't go blog about how you are working on game X if they don't want you to.
Brian
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
