Unsealed GT Advanced Court Documents Give Insight Into Apple's Business Practices

[kdarling]

Not at all. Pretty basic stuff.

Yep. Although most NDAs don't spell out what the monetary penalties are, relying instead on courts to decide.

I suppose it is if you happen to work for the CIA.

Hardly. Commercial documents are nothing in comparison to government contracts, which point out that disclosures can be expected to cause grave damage to a nation's security and possibly result in people's deaths.

This reminds me of the WWII-Manhattan Project stuff!

Except the Manhattan Project affected the lives of millions and the outcome of a huge chunk of world history. Many of us here would not even exist if our forebears had been killed in an invasion of the Japanese homeland.

This NDA was simply about a company using confidential techniques to possibly gain a competitive advantage, in order to make more money.

 

[0815]

sound like the usual routine stuff for big scale project with big companies.

In the company I work for, we have to do this from time to time when dealing with the big players in the market - first time I was laughing about all the code names and security stuff, by now it is 'business as usual' for me.

Really nothing to cry and complain about - big companies (and small ones) need to protect their ass and sometimes don't want competition to know who is talking with whom about what (especially when they are publicly traded). This is fair game.

And if a company does not like that stuff, they have a choice: do not play with the big guys, nobody is forcing you to sign any of it ... but of course you than won't get the benefits of the cooperation.


Also on a side note: we once started negotiating with Apple, but they refused to sign a NDA (claiming that they in general don't sign NDA's) - negations went a little further (without showing them too much technical detail) but ultimately we walked away since we were not willing to show them our IP without having a signed NDA in place (which is part of our policy - not even Apple could change that, and that is a good thing - small companies need also to protect their ass)

 

[Col4bin]

So pretty much exactly what was speculated on, turns out really was the case with this partnership falling through. I got a ton of flak for putting my opinion out there. Happy to be validated.

 

[SolarShane]

And the fanboys claim they don't have access to your data or that they don't track you?

If Apple does it to it's suppliers, what's stopping them from doing it to their users?

 

[coolfactor]

Seems that GTAT's CEO needs to go take course on business 101.

Seems like the CEO needs to wear a Dunce hat for a year, unpaid.

 

[RockSpider]

They should make a movie about Apple and call it, "Get Smart" and get Charley Sheen to play Paxwell Smart.

 

[JackieInCo]

Seems that GTAT's CEO needs to go take course on business 101.

GT Advanced seems like they are one of the most unprofessional companies that Apple has ever dealt with.

 

[pubwvj]

Nothing unusual. Standard operating procedures. So what's all this whining about the contracts being so hard?

 

[Traverse]

Apple loves their secrecy, I can respect that. Still, part of me wants to say "get over yourself" when I read the part about disallowing employees to mention Apple except by code name.

 

[KdParker]

And the fanboys claim they don't have access to your data or that they don't track you?

If Apple does it to it's suppliers, what's stopping them from doing it to their users?

?? like one thing relates to the other.

Also any company that has access to your personal habits will track them for some reason. This is nothing new.

 

[Peace]

How ridiculous is Apple.

Just as ridiculous as GT for agreeing.

 

[advancewarsbest]

As people are talking about apples harsh policies. Am i the only one pleased by this?

"Comply with Apple's Supplier Code of Conduct, which demands safe working conditions for employees."

 

[yaxomoxay]

If Apple does it to it's suppliers, what's stopping them from doing it to their users?

A signed contract.

 

[mikemch16]

Did they hold a gun to your head? No! You could have done business with someone else but you chose to do business with apple which could have been a lucrative venture for you. Then you failed and you go crying about how things weren't fair. The executives at GT are acting like a kid who didn't get what he wanted for his birthday...

 

[TouchMint.com]

So I can see apple screwing people over but I just don't get why they would do it to a company they were planning on depending on so much.

I feel like apple set it up so that if things went perfectly everything would be fine but if there was even a little slip up gt was screwed.

 

[Keirasplace]

So I can see apple screwing people over but I just don't get why they would do it to a company they were planning on depending on so much.

I feel like apple set it up so that if things went perfectly everything would be fine but if there was even a little slip up gt was screwed.

Right... So, you think Apple didn'T get screwed? Apple lost the most money here and the employees lost their jobs. The C level execs lost nothing at all, they made tens of millions, so they signed it and lost zero while everyone else lose big.

 

[KPandian1]

How would you want your contractor to sign?

Nothing in the drafts is sinister. While it is not an official secrets acts contract of CIA, NSA or MI6, in the world of industrial espionage, what other contract should Apple put on the table?

If such a contract scares you, walk away! Billions of dollars and thousands of jobs (or more) depend on a single project!

Such is the nature of contracts signed at the "boss" levels.

This is a top of the world company you want to work with - not a start-up that has a >75% chance of failure! If you can meet your commitments, success and wealth (profits) are phenomenal!

 

[gr8tfly]

Sounds pretty standard to me, having had both DOD and corporate project clearances.

 

[69650]

I would not want to be an Apple supplier no matter how potentially lucrative the deal was.

 

[collegitdept]

I would not want to be an Apple supplier no matter how potentially lucrative the deal was.

So don't. That's the point many seem to lack understanding of.

BTW. NDA & strict contracts are the norm for anything high-tech company. So if I were you, I'd stay away from all tech companies. And defense

 

[wizard]

This reminds me of the WWII-Manhattan Project stuff!

This may sound strange to some people but if you work in a regulated industry it is an everyday thing. Here I talking FDA, but medical is far from the only industry highly regulated. The FDA just loves access controls and security programs.

 

[Dekema2]

This may sound strange to some people but if you work in a regulated industry it is an everyday thing. Here I talking FDA, but medical is far from the only industry highly regulated. The FDA just loves access controls and security programs.

When you say FDA, do you mean whistleblowers for companies?

 

[wizard]

These terms are common with most companies. These terms are not evil in any way, just strict.

Actually I'm not that sure you could even call them strict, I've seen far worst. These sorts of agreements are just the normal way you do business. If GT really wanted to they could have walked away from the business.

I do have problems with companies that go over board with trying to strangle people looking for a job though. Years ago I blew a job interview because the company was massively out of control with NDAs and the like for a job interview. It gets to a point where ethics go out the window. Fortunately I could afford to do that at the time, I'd hate to interview with a company like that if I really needed a job.

As for the company I have to wonder if the know how sleazy they look when they saddle a interviewee with such nonsense. Believe me this was a position that did not require revealing trade secrets to determine qualifications.

----------

I suppose it is if you happen to work for the CIA.

No really it is pretty basic stuff. You have no choice but to detail everything expected of a vendor.

 

[McDaddio]

Apple's Supplier Code of Conduct, which demands safe working conditions for employees.

OMG. Truly they are history's greatest monsters.

 

[ChrisA]

Those terms are common with companies who work in the defense industry. I'd bet a bunch that many of the security people at Apple have backgrounds at defense contractors. The wording is so similar.