>>19222015Typically, NDAs outline an as-concrete-as-possible list of things both parties aren't allowed to disclose that pertain to what the company or contract holds. Those things have to be reviewed and approved by legal council to make any potential disputes easier to resolve. In the case of what Hololive is working with, I can imagine some examples:
>addresses and personally identifiable information of fellow talents>upcoming contracts/dismissals of talents>company financial plans (which all talents besides maybe Fubuki have no knowledge of anyway)>organization related info that would impact competitorsReal names of employees, especially that don't link to an exact identity, how you were treated in the company, how you felt while working there, etc, would NEVER make it past legal approval for any non-government jobs or contracts that aren't in the realm of national security.
Cover fired her primarily on the basis of defamation. Remember that companies have the right to terminate your employment for any reason as long as they can veil it under something. This is why they aren't pursuing legal action after her dismissal, had a direct breach of their NDA been identified a court case would have been almost immediate (before she would have gotten fired). However, Rushia has the ability to dispute the defamation, which could result in an investigation on, once again, both parties, that might bring up enough evidence to show that what Rushia had claimed is, in fact, true. This could easily backfire on Cover because legal definitions regarding how someone was treated are up to a lot of interpretation, so they want to avoid it. The cheapest option for Cover at this point would be try to pay her to keep her mouth shut without going to court.
