From: David Prosser <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 21:51:43 +0100

I was once invited to dinner with a dozen or so corporate investors
from the City of London.  They were interested in hearing the library
view of how the journal publishing system worked and what the customer
thought of some of the large players in the field (they almost never
hear from customers, only the companies).

I explained that a number of NDA were in place and that they were
justified by the suppliers as a way of ensuring lower prices for
customers.  The corporate investors all laughed at me.  I'm not sure
they were convinced.

David Prosser


On 29 May 2012, at 19:51, LIBLICENSE wrote:

> From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 07:45:49 -0700
>
> Phil Davis has a thoughtful post on the Kitchen today on the role of
> NDAs in license negotiations:
>
> http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2012/05/29/ndas-economic-tool-or-kabuki-theatre/
>
> Phil's view is that NDAs are not all that bad.  Many people will
> disagree with him.
>
> Phil doesn't go far enough.  NDAs lower prices and increase
> flexibility.  It's also the right thing to do.  In the absence of
> them, every publisher sees the terms of every other publisher, which
> leads to rigid standardization.
>
> Of course, advocates of openness will argue that the virtues of
> transparency far outweigh any practical shortcomings.  I will remember
> this as I write my kids' tuition checks.
>
> Joe Esposito
>
> Joseph J. Esposito
> Portable CEO
> [log in to unmask]
> @josephjesposito
> +Joseph Esposito