While there is a restriction against disclosure of the terms of the agreement, there is an exception for matters required to be disclosed by applicable laws. 

So if Poet wanted to disclose some otherwise restricted info, they would first seek the consent of Sanan, and if Sanan does not consent, then Poet would have the burden of proving disclosure is required.

If a regulator requires the information be disclosed, then, unless both parties agree to the disclosure, the party to whom the regulator has made the request (demand) for disclosure is obligated to seek a protective order essentially telling the regulator to bug off.  

The overarching sense of the agreement in terms of disclosure allows either party to fight disclosure and if disclosure is required to limit disclosure to the extent possible. 

The interesting part of the agreement is in the exhibits, the key ones of which are pretty much redacted as being potentially advantageous to competitors. So not much can be learned of the terms that would be of interest to us.  

The above is from an extremely cursory and thoroughly unprofessional review of a very few of the 256 pages of the document.