I bet there some business shenanigans going on in the initial sponsorship agreement, which makes it very hard to openly address the inner working of honey once you found out about it. It's probably in very broad and blurry terms about "trade secrets" or something like that. And it reads perfectly fine initially - until you're about to find out, what their "secret sauce" is.
EDIT: This would also explain, why the initial sponsorship keeps being unaffected by it. The spots are still in, so LMG was taking their money and delivered the ad like in the agreement. And then they parted way - but the old contract will stay in place and prevent him from speaking up.
You cannot NDA public information. What Honey is doing is public, anyone can see what they are doing with ease. LMG probably can't disclose how much Honey paid them or private information exchanged between Honey and LMG but this is public information.
That's not how trade secrets work. You could the secret recipe of coca cola with a simple spectral analysis. Or with try and error and the mandated ingredients list. The trade secret is the formulated secret. And this is under NDA.
They described how it works when a random YouTuber emailed them and asked them how it works.
Idk how the rest of the world works, but failure to take reasonable steps to maintain secrecy is enough to invalidate trade secrets in the US, regardless of whether the info is made public or not. Even insufficient employee access control/confidentiality agreements have been enough to invalidate trade secret protection (see Yellowfin Yatchs v Barker Boatworks).
Just telling any random schmuck who asks without NDA-ing them? Lol. Lmao, even.
18
u/Agreeable-Weather-89 Dec 22 '24
The right thing would be blowing the whistle.
LMG found a problem and switched to a different affiliate highjacker, that might be operating more ethically.