I have not read the book.
But this line of argument doesn’t always hold with me. At some point, the behaviour of a company or person could be so heinous, that no amount of voluntary signing of an agreement should prevent you from exposing them.
But this line of argument doesn’t always hold with me. At some point, the behaviour of a company or person could be so heinous, that no amount of voluntary signing of an agreement should prevent you from exposing them.
"I then sued my victim for causing me harm."
But it's hard to know about a situation when it's complex and you're a long way away from it. Maybe the book was unfair. Maybe it was fair. Or both. Maybe what happened was so bad it should supersede this kind of agreement. Who decides, and how?
If the author would report a crime she would be protected. The author is just airing some dirty laundry. She was paid money in exchange for not airing said dirty laundry. Hence her troubles now. Cry me a river.
[0] Whisleblower protections: https://www.dol.gov/general/topics/whistleblower
It's really quite simple.
IMHO, the book has little or nothing about the kind of things we usually see called out in NDA breaches: ideas or code names from products, details on contract negotiations with competitors, internal processes, etc. The author was involved with managing relationships between Facebook and foreign governments and this makes up the meat of the book.