At 06:38 AM 6/18/2007, you wrote:

>Back to your case, I think that you need to do is to somehow convince
>a lawyer that he needs to implement such a clause retroactively in 
>case of need
>(and see what precedents exist). I am not a lawyer and I do not know how it's
>done but this would be about the safest step to be taken now imho (without
>disturbing the waters).

I have never seen such an agreement that didn't exclude information that
was known beforehand or legitimately learned afterward through third parties
or from public sources.

But there are still many potential pitfalls, and the fact that the erstwhile
client believes that the contract will effectively constrain him from
producing a product. It's also reasonable question.. why didn't he use the
info long before? What, exactly, changed after dealing with the client?
Perhaps making an arrangement now with the client is the best move-- 
to paraphrase
Winston Churchill, to jaw-jaw is always better than to litigate-litigate.

BTW, to save a lot of speculation, posting a link to the actual contract might
be a useful exercise. Perhaps with the names removed (desirable for privacy,
but also in some cases, merely disclosing the existence of a relationship is
specifically prohibited!).

>Best regards,

Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..."            "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com



-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist