Written by Brad Shu, Partner, DHH Law Firm Shanghai · All articles are informational only — not legal advice
NNN Agreements & OEM Agreements

China NNN Agreements FAQ (1): Basics, Definitions, and What You Are Signing

The fundamentals: what NNN stands for, how it differs from an NDA, whether names and registration matter, and the questions buyers ask before anything else.

TL;DR — the essentials

  • Part 1 of six in the FAQ series accompanying the main guide, China NNN Agreements: The Complete Guide for Foreign Buyers. This part answers questions Q1–Q10 of the series’ 62.
  • The fundamentals: what NNN stands for, how it differs from an NDA, whether names and registration matter, and the questions buyers ask before anything else.
  • Start with the main guide for the full picture; use the FAQ series for the specific question you have today.

Part 1 of six in the FAQ series. The core text of the topic is the main guide; the other FAQ parts are listed at the bottom of this page.

Questions in this part

Q1. What is a China NNN agreement? What does NNN stand for?

Non-disclosure, non-use, non-circumvention — a contract that stops a Chinese partner from (1) revealing your confidential information, (2) using it for its own or others’ benefit (making your product, look-alikes, or competing products), and (3) going around you to your customers, distributors, or suppliers. It is purpose-built for China manufacturing, where the dominant risks are use and circumvention, not leakage.

Q2. How is an NNN different from a standard NDA?

A conventional — especially US-style — NDA prohibits disclosure and usually relies on trade-secret law and a home-country forum. In a China manufacturing deal that fails twice over: it prohibits too little (a factory can keep your drawings secret and still use them) and it enforces in the wrong place (a foreign judgment is generally uncollectible in China). An NNN adds the use and circumvention prohibitions and is drafted for Chinese law and a Chinese forum. Translating the NDA into Chinese fixes neither problem.

Q3. Is a standard NDA good enough for a Chinese factory?

Not by itself. But the test is substance, not the label: an agreement called an NDA that actually contains non-disclosure, non-use, and non-circumvention clauses under PRC law, with a Chinese forum and proper execution, is functionally an NNN and can be enforced. An agreement called an NNN that lacks those clauses, or points disputes abroad, is worthless. What matters is the governing law, the forum, the scope of the prohibitions — and whether the 3N clauses are actually in there.

Q4. Are all NDAs legally binding?

No. Enforceability depends on drafting quality, the parties, governing law, execution, and forum. An unclear, non-compliant, or foreign-law NDA may not hold up.

Q5. What are the downsides of signing an NDA, for me?

A genuinely two-way (mutual) agreement can restrict your future activities and adds negotiation complexity; a poorly scoped agreement can be construed narrowly against the discloser; and boilerplate meant for common-law systems sits awkwardly under Chinese law.

Q6. Does an NNN need to be registered with the Chinese government to be valid?

No registration is required for validity. What matters is the correct legal entity, execution that matches the agreement’s effectiveness clause (the guide’s execution section), and enforceable terms. Fake-chop and wrong-seal risks remain.

Q7. Is the second N “non-use” or “non-compete”?

Predominant usage is non-use, and that is the better framing: what a supplier can actually do to you is use — make, sell, adapt. Some documents say “non-competition.” Read the obligations, not the label; an agreement whose non-use exists only as an implied shadow of the confidentiality clause is weaker than one that prohibits the conduct expressly.

Q8. When should the NNN be signed? Do I need one before sending a sample?

Before disclosing anything worth protecting — CAD files, specifications, prototypes, samples, moulds, pricing, customer information, manufacturing know-how. Even preliminary sketches and prototype photos count. Once information is out, it cannot be recalled, and waiting creates a factual dispute over what the factory received pre-agreement. During factory selection, each candidate factory signs before receiving quote-level information.

Q9. Do I need an NNN at all?

The test is substantive: if intellectual property or confidential information will change hands, you need NNN protection; if you are disclosing nothing of value, you do not. Where a factory is already selected and a comprehensive manufacturing agreement with the 3N clauses will be signed before anything sensitive is disclosed, one contract can replace two — provided it expressly preserves claims for pre-signing disclosures. Practitioners report roughly half of standalone-NNN inquiries can be handled this way.

Q10. Does the Manufacturing Agreement replace the NNN?

Only if it says so deliberately and correctly: the manufacturing agreement must expressly preserve claims arising from pre-signing disclosures and breaches — a generic entire-agreement clause can be argued to supersede the NNN, including for the evaluation period. NNNs signed by non-selected finalist factories remain in force on their own terms.

The full series

Article Questions
Main guide core text, sections 1–13
FAQ part 1: basics and definitions ← you are here Q1–Q10
FAQ part 2: whether and when Q11–Q20
FAQ part 3: drafting Q21–Q30
FAQ part 4: language, law, execution Q31–Q40
FAQ part 5: money and disputes Q41–Q50
FAQ part 6: scenarios and gaps Q51–Q62

Frequently asked questions

What is a China NNN agreement? What does NNN stand for?
Non-disclosure, non-use, non-circumvention — a contract that stops a Chinese partner from (1) revealing your confidential information, (2) using it for its own or others' benefit (making your product, look-alikes, or competing products), and (3) going around you to your customers, distributors, or suppliers. It is purpose-built for China manufacturing, where the dominant risks are use and circumvention, not leakage.
How is an NNN different from a standard NDA?
A conventional — especially US-style — NDA prohibits disclosure and usually relies on trade-secret law and a home-country forum. In a China manufacturing deal that fails twice over: it prohibits too little (a factory can keep your drawings secret and still use them) and it enforces in the wrong place (a foreign judgment is generally uncollectible in China). An NNN adds the use and circumvention prohibitions and is drafted for Chinese law and a Chinese forum. Translating the NDA into Chinese fixes neither problem.
Is a standard NDA good enough for a Chinese factory?
Not by itself. But the test is substance, not the label: an agreement *called* an NDA that actually contains non-disclosure, non-use, and non-circumvention clauses under PRC law, with a Chinese forum and proper execution, is functionally an NNN and can be enforced. An agreement *called* an NNN that lacks those clauses, or points disputes abroad, is worthless. What matters is the governing law, the forum, the scope of the prohibitions — and whether the 3N clauses are actually in there.
Are all NDAs legally binding?
No. Enforceability depends on drafting quality, the parties, governing law, execution, and forum. An unclear, non-compliant, or foreign-law NDA may not hold up.
What are the downsides of signing an NDA, for me?
A genuinely two-way (mutual) agreement can restrict *your* future activities and adds negotiation complexity; a poorly scoped agreement can be construed narrowly against the discloser; and boilerplate meant for common-law systems sits awkwardly under Chinese law.
Does an NNN need to be registered with the Chinese government to be valid?
No registration is required for validity. What matters is the correct legal entity, execution that matches the agreement's effectiveness clause (the guide’s execution section), and enforceable terms. Fake-chop and wrong-seal risks remain.
Is the second N "non-use" or "non-compete"?
Predominant usage is non-use, and that is the better framing: what a supplier can actually do to you is *use* — make, sell, adapt. Some documents say "non-competition." Read the obligations, not the label; an agreement whose non-use exists only as an implied shadow of the confidentiality clause is weaker than one that prohibits the conduct expressly.
When should the NNN be signed? Do I need one before sending a sample?
Before disclosing anything worth protecting — CAD files, specifications, prototypes, samples, moulds, pricing, customer information, manufacturing know-how. Even preliminary sketches and prototype photos count. Once information is out, it cannot be recalled, and waiting creates a factual dispute over what the factory received pre-agreement. During factory selection, each candidate factory signs before receiving quote-level information.
Do I need an NNN at all?
The test is substantive: if intellectual property or confidential information will change hands, you need NNN protection; if you are disclosing nothing of value, you do not. Where a factory is already selected and a comprehensive manufacturing agreement with the 3N clauses will be signed *before* anything sensitive is disclosed, one contract can replace two — provided it expressly preserves claims for pre-signing disclosures. Practitioners report roughly half of standalone-NNN inquiries can be handled this way.
Does the Manufacturing Agreement replace the NNN?
Only if it says so deliberately and correctly: the manufacturing agreement must expressly preserve claims arising from pre-signing disclosures and breaches — a generic entire-agreement clause can be argued to supersede the NNN, including for the evaluation period. NNNs signed by non-selected finalist factories remain in force on their own terms.

Need help with this? Brad advises clients on exactly this — from WFOE setup to tax structuring and compliance. Tell him about your situation.

Ask Brad

Ask a question about this article

日本語でのご質問も歓迎します。

Your question goes directly to Brad's inbox and is not published — no comment section, no public thread. Please don't include highly confidential details in a first message.

Brad Shu

Partner at DHH Law Firm Shanghai · Formerly Squire Sanders, Morrison Foerster & Jingtian Law Firm · Hangzhou Normal University (B.A. Biology) · Tsinghua University (LL.B.)

Brad Shu is a partner at DHH Law Firm Shanghai and has practiced Chinese law for two decades, including nearly ten years between the Beijing offices of US firms Squire Sanders and Morrison Foerster and leading local firm Jingtian & Gongcheng.