Next <
From: RichA <rander3128@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Slimy Chinese drone firm tried to silence security analyst
Full headers:
X-Received: by 10.200.33.247 with SMTP id 52mr19228393qtz.50.1511400297717;
Wed, 22 Nov 2017 17:24:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.31.131.145 with SMTP id f139mr2031623vkd.11.1511400297599;
Wed, 22 Nov 2017 17:24:57 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!g35no656989qtk.1!news-out.google.com!t48ni1467qtc.1!nntp.google.com!m31no656442qtf.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 17:24:57 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <211120171355532912%nospam@nospam.invalid>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=184.75.212.52;
posting-account=8Vsz_woAAABQPV3Epo66m_rYvK1EHzOV
NNTP-Posting-Host: 184.75.212.52
References: <44bc261b-de89-407a-8c99-6f95de40586a@googlegroups.com>
<MPG.347e9347505b023b98cf22@news.supernews.com> <211120171355532912%nospam@nospam.invalid>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <5423ee37-cc8e-43ae-a584-76051f15847e@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Slimy Chinese drone firm tried to silence security analyst
From: RichA <rander3128@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2017 01:24:57 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 12
Print Article
Forward Article
On Tuesday, 21 November 2017 13:55:59 UTC-5, nospam  wrote:
> In article<MPG.347e9347505b023b98cf22@news.supernews.com>, Alfred
> Molon<alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article<44bc261b-de89-407a-8c99-6f95de40586a@googlegroups.com>, 
> > RichA says...
> > > http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-42052473
> > 
> > Why are they slimy?
> 
> read the article. it's rather clear.

A lot of courts are now ruling against the validity of "non-disclosure" agreements as being used to
cover-up illicit activity and are therefore not lawfully-enforceable.