I don't think it works that way. Putting information behind an NDA does not make it "forbidden information" that nobody can ever use. It means that one party (the one who signed the NDA) can't disclose it. To the extent someone either violates the NDA or the owner is sloppy and posts the information publicly, there are no restrictions on what people NOT party to the NDA can do with it.

Nintendo (and others) are free to go after those who violate NDAs, and to go after scrapers or whatnot, but they can't declare the information itself off-limits to everyone.

▲

bragr 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Trade secrets are absolutely protected by law. There are limits of course, but they are protected.

▲

justinclift 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

If the owner of a trade secret publishes (non-trivial) documentation about it, even accidentally, isn't it then no longer a trade secret?

▲

isityettime 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Is it that trade secrets are protected or that corporate espionage is prohibited?

▲

bragr 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Both

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Trade_Secrets_Act

	▲	LadyCailin 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		They’re protected in certain ways. Notably though, they are NOT protected from reverse engineering.