Interesting article! One thing I'm confused a little on, are you anti-NDA for interviews or anti-NDA altogether? I can totally get behind the weirdness of signing an NDA for doing an interview though I feel that an NDA of some sort may still be needed for a job.
I say may still be needed as really, I feel that it is somewhat implied with working. Divulging how the "secret sauce" (if there is one) works really should have consequences. Talking around the topic and explaining other non-"secret sauce" things (eg. we use XYZ tech stack) is something that shouldn't really matter.
I agree about non-competes. I kinda get why they exist but they also don't make a lot of sense. When I worked as a web developer, if I left that job and couldn't work at another web development agency at all for X years, that is pretty terrible.
I'd say I'm 99.99% anti-NDA for interviews and 80% anti-NDA altogether, simply for the fact that most of them are pretty draconian and abusive.
As for the NDA for a job being necessary, I think the principle behind the NDA is necessary: both parties agree that a given secret is not meant to be divulged. And yeah, there should be consequences if someone does divulge that secret. But a short, well-written document, with no "legalese" language in it, detailing exactly and specifically what is being protected, should be enough. There should be no place for abusive, draconian, one-way responsibilities and massive consequences for protecting what most of the time isn't even worth protecting.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Interesting article! One thing I'm confused a little on, are you anti-NDA for interviews or anti-NDA altogether? I can totally get behind the weirdness of signing an NDA for doing an interview though I feel that an NDA of some sort may still be needed for a job.
I say may still be needed as really, I feel that it is somewhat implied with working. Divulging how the "secret sauce" (if there is one) works really should have consequences. Talking around the topic and explaining other non-"secret sauce" things (eg. we use XYZ tech stack) is something that shouldn't really matter.
I agree about non-competes. I kinda get why they exist but they also don't make a lot of sense. When I worked as a web developer, if I left that job and couldn't work at another web development agency at all for X years, that is pretty terrible.
Thanks James.
I'd say I'm 99.99% anti-NDA for interviews and 80% anti-NDA altogether, simply for the fact that most of them are pretty draconian and abusive.
As for the NDA for a job being necessary, I think the principle behind the NDA is necessary: both parties agree that a given secret is not meant to be divulged. And yeah, there should be consequences if someone does divulge that secret. But a short, well-written document, with no "legalese" language in it, detailing exactly and specifically what is being protected, should be enough. There should be no place for abusive, draconian, one-way responsibilities and massive consequences for protecting what most of the time isn't even worth protecting.