Re: Non-disclosure agreem

> Trotter Hardy Writes:
> >
> > The test case, I suppose, would be if the deal were modified to include
> > this: B says "I will tell you the date etc. and the liquidated damages
> > for breach will be $10. What do you say?" A agrees. Enforceable?
> > Restraint of trade?
>
>
> My instinct tells me that a judge would still find some of tossing
> the case out - either by saying the contract lacked consideration or
> the liquidated damages constituted a penalty.
>
>
> Don Berman --

Analytically, this case appears not so different from the situation where I pay for publicly available information. If I go to Datasearch and ask them to look up an incorporation in the Secretary of State's files, and they charge me $50 for it, I could have done it myself.

But the difference appears to me to be that I am being charged for the opportunity of transferring the information to someone else, rather than for the information itself. From a policy perspective, this appears to me by definition to be a "restraint of trade", even if it is so de minimus an example that it is difficult to know if it is legally so.

---
 ~ KWQ/2 1.2b ~ 
Harry L. Styron
<harry_s[_at_]holonet.net>