
Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement [pdf] - swixmix
https://www.gsa.gov/forms-library/classified-information-nondisclosure-agreement-0
======
glitchc
Assuming this is posted re: the civil litigation against Snowden, and is meant
to initiate a debate.

I'll bite: If he signed this, it's pretty much open and shut that he has to
forfeit all proceeds from any sales of a book or other medium containing said
secrets. However, if the medium does not actually contain any secrets, but is
rather about his ordeal and experiences as a whistleblower, well that's not
covered by this document. Hence why the state is suing instead.

~~~
mirimir
That would need to be settled in court. Which I guess is the point of the NDA
case. And it will almost certainly tie up any income from a book until
resolved.

Otherwise, I doubt that Russia will care any more about this than they've
cared about extradition demands. But even if his book was published in Russia,
global distribution would be difficult. While I'd actually prefer to pay with
Bitcoin via Tor, that wouldn't work generally.

~~~
wbl
The book can be distributed; he can't make money from it.

~~~
mirimir
The option of publishing in Russia would be letting him make money from it.
With a suitable cut to Putin, of course, in compensation for his kindness.

------
no_opinions
In criminal cases involving leaks, agreements like these often cited in
complaints as foundation the defendant knew and acknowledged the sensitivity
of the information.

\- Jeffrey Sterling:
[https://fas.org/sgp/jud/sterling/indict.pdf](https://fas.org/sgp/jud/sterling/indict.pdf),
[https://fas.org/sgp/jud/sterling/](https://fas.org/sgp/jud/sterling/)

\- John Kiriakou: [https://www.justice.gov/archive/opa/documents/kiriakou-
compl...](https://www.justice.gov/archive/opa/documents/kiriakou-
complaint.pdf)

Like Snowden's case, they tried to work around the Publication Review board
and all spoke to journalists.

There are mechanisms for people in the situation to file complaints without
going public: House and Senate Intelligence Committees, or to the CIA's Office
of the Inspector General. (Jeffrey Sterling's case mentioned this,
[https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-4th-
circuit/1639333.html#foot...](https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-4th-
circuit/1639333.html#footnote_ref_1))

------
swixmix
This is the agreement that assigns royalties to the United States.

~~~
GhettoMaestro
Not exactly - classified information is already effectively "owned" by the USG
from a stewardship perspective (not ownership). USG is supposed to protect and
safeguard said info - said info is still technically public domain (owned) -
it is just restricted due to national security implications.

SF-312 clearly specifies to the person receiving classified information that
they have unique requirements for handling and disclosure.

That said, given SF-312, I think Chelsea Manning had a lot more downside
exposure than Edward Snowden does. Ms. Manning shared the classified
information in a very vindictive and dangerous way. Mr. Snowden was very
careful in what and how he leaked with regards to the data in question.

Both acts are still technically violations of SF-312 (among other stuff, like
criminal law), but the extent of risk and damage done to the USG interests is
always evaluated.

(Have signed SF-312 multiple times in my life.)

------
killjoywashere
Having read some NDAs now, this is a doozy. Ctrl-S.

~~~
onetimemanytime
it covers everything that needs to be covered and no doubt it has been tried
and tested in many court cases. It's not like USA doesn't have lawyers able to
write 350 page NDAs

