Amidst much noise around Sean Diddy Combsnewly discovered arrest and future trial Nondisclosure Agreement (NDA) agreements shed light on the strict confidentiality measures surrounding his alleged “smashing” parties.
The music mogul, known for his exclusive, star-studded events, made guests sign NDAs that are all legally binding. The document, obtained by TMZ, offers a look at the extensive terms and conditions that prevent attendees from revealing what happened at the parties.
The document released by the portal shows that guests have been issued strict bans from discussing Diddy, his associates and any activities or people present at his events. Apparently, the NDA prohibits guests from sharing any information about Diddy, his family members, current or former partners. , or friends. According to the agreement, participants are prohibited from taking photos, filming or recording anything at these events without their written consent. This restriction also extends to social media posting, with the NDA listing specific platforms where guests are prohibited from sharing unauthorized content.
The agreement goes further, prohibiting participants from conducting interviews, writing books or broadcasting any details about the parties or Diddy’s private life without prior written consent. In a unique provision, the NDA is enforceable for either 70 years or the lifetime of the artist plus an additional 20 years, whichever is longer—a duration that far exceeds standard NDAs.
Diddy is currently incarcerated, awaiting trial on charges of racketeering conspiracy, forcible sex trafficking, fraud or coercion, and transportation to engage in prostitution.

Meanwhile, federal prosecutors said Diddy’s lawyers are trying to “hijack” the music mogul’s criminal case by asking a judge to force the early disclosure of evidence, including the identities of his accusers. Defense lawyers also asked for a gag order to prevent the accusers’ lawyers from commenting publicly and argued that government leaks to the media threatened the rapper’s chance for a fair trial.
Combs and faces civil processes by several men and women who claim they were sexually assaulted by Combs over the past quarter century after being drugged.
More than a dozen lawsuits filed in federal court in Manhattan were assigned to different judges, leading to different early rulings on whether the allegations were sufficiently made.

In one case, a judge ruled Wednesday that a Tennessee woman who claims Combs raped her in 2004 when she was 19 must proceed with little or no anonymity. The judge wrote that defendants have a right to investigate those who sue them, and the public has a right to know who is suing the courts.