Guest Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 I would think there would have to be something in writing to defend in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 (edited) Just want to share a concept that is time honored in US business and law: " opportunistic breach.".. Wikipedia probably has a great explanation..but in essence it means...we are expected to jump ship on any contract we make if better opportunity comes around...that is OK..(imagine if we insisted businesses stay with losing deals...) .what the court does (or the contract contingency) is determine what damages one must pay for jumping ship...So, if you can calculate the $$ damages to walking from a contract that's it...often you can settle by just paying and agreeing to end the contract.....but if you don't, and one party sues...they have to demonstrate the "damages" otherwise....well we don't allow a contract to weigh a business down just because a year ago it looked like a good deal........this is America and if you have a better deal move on (and calculate your obligation to the other party in damages)..... damages are a big topic in law....what is truly the $$ value of a breach? And is it enough to justify those $300 an hour lawyers and so on..... so, just throwing that out there...the concept "opportunistic breach" and note that Wikipedia is a great resource for basic legal definitions and info....as there are many standards in contracts and the underlying case law (and statutes, etc) very deep... I was raised rural middle America, where a "man keeps his word," and if he makes a deal finishes it even if it kills him lol that is some con job by the wealthy or something on the individual ......an example is the housing crisis....all kinds of moral guilt is laid on people who need to walk away...and yet..that was the basis of the bargain with the bank....it's opportunistic breach and the damages are in some states limited to losing the house and down payment (and lousy credit for a time) ....nothing wrong in letting the bank deal with the risk they signed up for.... ahhh time for coffee ..sorry for derail.. I felt a little bad the other day with a question someone had on contracts and when are they voidable....and the answer was, I can't say w/o the details.....many contracts are written and signed and voidable b/c the contract itself crosses contract boundaries and are unenforceable...so just b/c it's in writing doesn't mean it is a valid writing or contract....... Edited October 30, 2012 by apehuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Do NDAs have an expiry/invalidation date? Or do they persist for eternity/until publication, whichever comes first. The expiration date doesn't matter, the NDA's for this study are to establish ownership of the results which belongs to Dr. Ketchum. It had to be that lopsided to control release of information and maintain integrity of the study while it is submitted for peer review. Again, Dr. Ketchum owns the results and all rights to publish those results. Most submitters don't have any actual sequence data to actually breach their NDA's with and talking about what the results are would only qualify as anecdotal fodder. The Sykes study is no different, they've stated up front there would be no release of results until publication, and I'm sure Sykes and co-authors aquired full rights to do with those results as they see fit. It's a unidirectional flow of information and biological material until it publishes, thats the deal.Ketchum submitters can participate in other studies if they wish, since they still own whatever samples (and rights to results)they didn't send in to this study.Please don't frett for the Ketchum submitters, I'm sure they didn't invest what they couldn't afford to lose. I don't think this study is over with, or that it won't publish. When it's time, it will go public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 (edited) Southern Yahoo, was the NDA published on BE similar to the one you signed? I think some of the confusion about the "Ketchum NDAs" is the number of parties submitting over time and the changing landscape..., early on Biscardi, Javabob and I think Stubstad...and possibly the EP group had contracted or somehow involved with Ketchum with an eye toward commercial potential (the copyright apps point to that as well.. and maybe Paulides has more involvement there) through an LLC ... it seems the NDA character changed over time....or with the importance of the submission or cost of further testing? One big difference in the Oxford study is cost....there is none, although I think initial testing by Ketchum was reasonable at $200? p.s. I didn't actually read the one on BE for so many reasons...from is this real? To, I don't want to know So feel free not to answer my direct question... I don't want an opinion on these private party contracts! And I hope you are right, that this work will get published and open to study. Edited October 30, 2012 by apehuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 The NDA on page 273 post 8177 is not it apehuman, and I can't confirm or deny whether it is one drawn up by anyone who is actually involved in this study. Since it doesn't address rights or ownership of results it would appear to only apply to people with specific knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Thanks for the response...lol.."I can't confirm or deny" seems to be a popular quote these days! J/k...it matters not to me as I do think we shall hear something from Sykes within a reasonable time and many other people shall be worrying about what do we do now, and that might be one reason this thread stays alive even without any information...the consequences of proof Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 This study has had so many red flags I'm surprised anybody is still trying to defend it. How many times is this going to happen until people wise up? Super secret studies and evidence, nda's galore, discrepancies with samples, public Facebook page going dark, website down, disconnected phone, closed business, no foreward address, suspicious journal embargo, changing interpretation of dna(remember the copyright, now claims she interpreted them wrong), firing her PR spokesperson, I'm not buying it. This study will not prove sasquatch, if there even was a study. This whole thing reminds me of a state call Georgia back in 2008. Enter Mulder Ok, I'll play... All of those things have been addressed many times over in this thread. If you don't like the entirely reasonable explanations, too bad for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yowiie Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Am I missing something, the title of this thread is the "Ketchum report", well were is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Ok, I'll play... All of those things have been addressed many times over in this thread. If you don't like the entirely reasonable explanations, too bad for you. if you need that many explanations to justify the actions something's wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Twilight Fan Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Am I missing something, the title of this thread is the "Ketchum report", well were is it? Haha, that's what we'd ALL LIKE TO KNOW. This study has had so many red flags I'm surprised anybody is still trying to defend it. How many times is this going to happen until people wise up? Super secret studies and evidence, nda's galore, discrepancies with samples, public Facebook page going dark, website down, disconnected phone, closed business, no foreward address, suspicious journal embargo, changing interpretation of dna(remember the copyright, now claims she interpreted them wrong), firing her PR spokesperson, I'm not buying it. This study will not prove sasquatch, if there even was a study. This whole thing reminds me of a state call Georgia back in 2008. Enter Mulder Totally agree, squatting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Can someone please look on their NDA to see if in very small words it says "for entertainment purposes only"? :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 This study has had so many red flags I'm surprised anybody is still trying to defend it. How many times is this going to happen until people wise up? Super secret studies and evidence, nda's galore, discrepancies with samples, public Facebook page going dark, website down, disconnected phone, closed business, no foreward address, suspicious journal embargo, changing interpretation of dna(remember the copyright, now claims she interpreted them wrong), firing her PR spokesperson, I'm not buying it. This study will not prove sasquatch, if there even was a study. This whole thing reminds me of a state call Georgia back in 2008. If someone can't recognize that all of these things should be concerning to people involved in the study then there isn't much more that can be done to convince them. When the public Facebook site was up MK was in proactive mode in that she was attempting to control the flow of information and keep people informed. All that has changed. Now she is in reactive mode responding to the flow of information. Nobody chooses to be in reactive mode unless they simply have no choice. That is the biggest red flag of them all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 All things concerning the samples sounds like the natural progression of knowledge about the genome to me, and we wouldn't have any studies without it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 I actually look forward to RL's next update I'm looking forward to his next Lobotomy, The the 1st one didn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Can someone please look on their NDA to see if in very small words it says "for entertainment purposes only"? :-) How funny! that was my signature line on the old BFF - taken from the Ga Boys website... of course, I think they spelled it "perposes" - LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts