First, why is thevl temporary forum locked.
Was that the form you can throw out a temporary disposable post to let off some steam.
If not you should consider a self-destructing post forum.
Now the rant. Has anybody found it funny that injured people have to agree to silence for compensation of their wrong?
How is accepting such a settlement no better than threatening someone with blackmail.
It’s worse.
You’re stealing from the injured party the right to say that he was right and the other person was wrong and this is what the other person did to him.
What’s your take?
There are settlement agreements that don’t include NDA’s.
If you don’t like the terms of a settlement and can’t persuade the other party to change them before signing, you can threaten to pursue further action.
This is just hypothetical.
Why should an injured party agree to silence in return for compensation.
This could be many situations from a cram school treating a worker badly to say a law suit with Disney over failure to pay royalties to other things.
In examining some examples, I get the drift the the people causing the alleged harm are not admitting any real wrong doing but paying someone for silence and to go a way. Yes, the injured party is compensated for the wrong but similar people perhaps the in same situation are denied a precedent.
Interesting side question.
If a person is suing for the same infraction as the party who settled, could the party who have settled even with the non-disclosure agreement be forced to testify to what happened?
Would such testimony violate the terms of the earlier settlement.
To the earlier reply…
I’m questioning the validity and morality of the NDA in the first place. What happens to you is your personal history and you should have a right to say exactly what happened to anyone you want.
Can someone counter this argument and produce a good reason for an nda in this case?
NDAs to protect product secrets is another story that we’ve all signed. That’s perfectly fine.
Because the power equation is disproportionate most of the time. When you as a fresh grad sign up for a new job, they’ll make you sign a contract with will have binding arbitration clauses instead of right to courts.
Yes, in theory, you have a choice - not to sign it. But you may end up never getting a job since every company does this.
Oh the power equation is right out of whack. And NDA is often a non-negotiable aspect to reaching agreement in certain cases involving companies that can afford to drag out lawsuits indefinitely. Which is where the power equation really takes it up the keister.
I think in the most basic terms. The justice system in taiwan is absolutely horrifyingly shit. Everyone knows this and are scared to death of losing. As such there are many predators, without morals, that can take advantage of this fact and as such many innocent victims get screwed.
There is also this societal common knowledge that you want to settle because people get pissed off after a point and are willing to burn bridges for revenge. that defeats the purpose. as such, many people jsut try to get rid of issues right away and move on, because its stressful as all hell going through a court situation in taiwan
The hope/assumption is that people wont call a bluff, but when they do, shit either dies or gets real. Fast.
I believe one of my fellow mods would strongly disagree with you there. I would disagree with the “absolutely horrifyingly shit” part, but I wouldn’t agree with Mr. Mod either.
Sometimes NDA’s work for both parties, I know of one case where Company A was suing company B. In the end Company A ended up paying company B’s legal fees and then some, which was no small amount.
Publicly and it was a very public case, it looked like company B had settled with company A when in fact it was the other way round, had the case continued company A would have lost and that would have been publicly known and company B wouldn’t have had their legal fees plus compensation paid to them, so the arrangement just suited them both.
Props to you. i think most people are scared of losing and have this fear in them all the time, so we have a settlement type culture. Not saying right or wrong, but it has been my overwhelmingly common experience.
I have respect for anyone willing to fight for whats right, even if people tell them its impossible. We need more like that
Taiwan’s seems to be better than others I have experienced.
And expensive. Even filing the original application is not cheap. The way it seems is that it’s just in reach of the ordinary person and that’s about it. That’s without legal representation too.
Or release it through a third country that is not covered by the NDA. But Explant is right. You have to be happy you will never get credit for it. You also have to be prepared that whoever you signed the NDA will not still try and go after you. You could always say your computer was hacked or you lost your hard drive transiting through an airport but they could still technically go after you based on what was agreed to with the NDA.
I’ve personally been involved in a case spanning the last 3+ years now. It’s draining. The other side have admitted fault. A settlement was offered and rejected. Lots of laws were broken by lawyers. Case reviews have been made. It will end up in Mediation with no chance of ever seeing a court based on the evidence that the aggrieved party has against the other. At the end of the day if you are just a little person going up against an established/wealthy person/business/institution it’s a costly exercise. Judges have very little sympathy if you represent yourself and make mistakes with court filings.
Having said that Taiwan’s system seems to be a bit more like the French where there is an element of searching for the truth rather than awarding the best told story. Miles apart from the litigious US based system where it can take 15-20 years to see a case through to its conclusion.
