Can Ending NDAs Help the AI Industry Win Over Data Center Critics?

Amazon has joined Microsoft in announcing it will cease using nondisclosure agreements during negotiations with local governments regarding data center construction. The policy shift was detailed in a broader blog post aimed at arguing that these facilities benefit the communities they inhabit.

The move comes amid growing political pushback against AI infrastructure, with several municipalities enacting moratoriums on new data centers. On a recent episode of TechCrunch’s Equity podcast, hosts Sean O’Kane and Rebecca Bellan, alongside Anthony Ha, analyzed whether abandoning secrecy agreements is enough to address public concerns.

O’Kane argued that the reliance on confidentiality agreements is a root cause of the friction between the tech sector and local governments. He noted that many projects are negotiated behind closed doors, with the public often unaware of who will ultimately occupy the facilities. Drawing a parallel to Uber’s aggressive expansion in the mid-2010s, O’Kane highlighted how secretive negotiations can embolden companies to demand excessive tax subsidies and other concessions.

“There needs to be more [transparency]. I’m glad Amazon’s doing this. We’ll see if it actually does have any positive effect, but people are pretty entrenched right now,” O’Kane said.

Bellan expressed skepticism about the immediate impact of the policy change on the wave of local bans. She pointed out that most moratoriums are temporary, lasting only one or two years, whereas data centers typically take several years to come online. While zoning and funding issues already delay construction, she questioned whether political resistance would significantly alter the long-term trajectory of the industry.

Ha noted that existing restrictions, such as New York State’s one-year pause on large data center permits, often contain loopholes. He observed that while officials frame these measures as calls for further study rather than outright rejection, the urgency of the industry’s response suggests otherwise. The disappearance of NDAs, he added, addresses a primary complaint from opponents: that they were never given clear information about what was being built.

However, O’Kane cautioned that ending NDAs is merely a first step. He identified a broader communication failure across the tech industry, exacerbated by a trend toward bypassing traditional media outlets. He argued that companies frequently struggle to articulate the tangible benefits of their technologies to the general public.

O’Kane cited Tesla’s recent rebranding of its mission to “amazing abundance” as an example of vague corporate messaging. Despite releasing a detailed PDF outlining the concept, the company faced criticism even from loyal supporters for failing to provide a concrete definition. Ha agreed, noting that the promise itself revealed a shift in how Tesla is perceived—not merely as a car manufacturer, but as a vehicle for a broader societal transformation.

Both hosts agreed that the industry can no longer rely on narratives of inevitability. As public skepticism grows, O’Kane concluded, tech companies must make a substantive case for their projects rather than expecting compliance based on the assumption that the future is already written.