Feds should bust INQUIRER site

According to the post, we post "insider information" every chance we get.

Earlier posts suggest that we are also at fault for publishing information held under non-disclosure agreements (NDAs).

But as we don't sign these instruments, which are often drafted under the laws of Delaware or other US states, we don't see what the big fuss is all about.

To the best of our knowledge, no-one has ever been arraigned in a UK court for breaching an NDA, the jurisdiction of which are highly doubtful anyway.

If we blew the whistle on our moles that we meet in the Porcupine pub, they'd lose their jobs soon enough, we'd wager.

The perceived problem may be due to the different nature of journalism across the globe and for that matter on the World Wild Web too.

August organisations like the Intel Corporation realise that journalism differs from place to place, which is why they publish documents like this one.

We take the view here that if we just waited for the press releases to come out, we might just as well be PR Business Wire rather than the INQwell.

You can find the SI post here. µ

* INQUIRER STAFF do not invest in companies we write about.