copyright, domains, patent, trade secret

What Ownership Does…

Ownership is more than just owning something.

When I was an army officer, we assigned drivers to particular vehicles. Why? Drivers take pride in their vehicles and maintain them better when they take “ownership”. It was enough to assign the vehicle to the driver. Downtime was reduced.

Ownership is a mindset.

If you truly OWN your iP, others will respect it more. So, take the time to own your iP.

It doesn’t take that much time or money. Just make sure the agreements necessary to transfer rights in iP to your company are available and used.

​Read More
trade secret

Possession of a Trade Secret Is Enough?

This is an interesting case out of Pennsylvania, because the company possessing the trade secret did not own it. Yet, the court of appeals held that it still had standing to bring a lawsuit. Nothing in the Pennsylvania statute required “ownership” per se in order to sue for misappropriation of a trade secret.

In Advanced Fluid Systems Inc v. Huber, No. 19-1722 (3d Cir. 2020), there was another wrinkle. The company wasn’t using a nondisclosure agreement. However, the appeals court found other measures that protected the information. So, not having an NDA might not be fatal to a trade secret claim. Nevertheless, why not have an NDA, when you can quickly and easily create an NDA + iP agreement with the iPscaling trade secret sprint.

Or click here to sign up:

https://ipmasterclass.thinkific.com/enroll/716771?price_id=761405

​Read More
trade secret, Uncategorized

Trade Secret Safety

It’s no secret that trade secret theft is rampant, and it seems that much of it is being supported by Chinese sources.

Recently, Hongjin Tan, a Chinese national and former scientist at Phillips 66, was sentenced to 2-years imprisonment following a guilty plea for copying files that contained trade secrets relating to battery technology. He downloaded hundreds of files to a flash drive before tendering his resignation. Some of those files were later found on Tan’s external drive at his home.

The technology was work $1 billion. Wouldn’t it have been a good idea to restrict access to those files? Do you have any restrictions on who can download restricted files in your business?

​Read More
trade secret

Court dismisses DNC trade secret case

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) sued the Russian Federation and others for theft of trade secrets and other counts. 

The “relief from the alleged activities of the Russian Federation should be sought from the political branches of the Government and not from the courts,” because sovereign nations cannot be hauled into civil lawsuits without some waiver of their sovereign immunity. 

The DNC’s trade secret claims under the Defend Trade Secrets Act and a local Uniform Trade Secrets Act were dismissed because the DNC failed to identify facts that supported a conclusion that it owned any valuable trade secrets, took reasonable measures to protect, and derived commercial benefits from keeping the allegedly purloined information as trade secrets.  anything about the development of the list and strategies or the value of their alleged secrecy. The DNC made “conclusory allegations” that were “insufficient to state that the stolen documents were trade secrets.”

Also, the dissemination of already publicly released documents is not misappropriation, and trade secret law only protects against misappropriation. The DNC failed to allege liability, except for the Russian Federation, for any of the hacks of the DNC’s computer systems. The remaining defendants were not liable for use of documents, even if previously trade secret, after the documents were published. Use of “documents that had already been published by the Russian Federation and WikiLeaks is not an unlawful or improper use of the documents.” A “trade secret that becomes public knowledge is no longer a trade secret.” And “…so long as the disseminator did not participate in any wrongdoing in obtaining the materials in the first place,” the dissemination is protected free speech. 

The Court distinguished between soliciting someone “…to steal documents…” and “…a request for material that had been stolen,” already.  The law is clear that “journalists are allowed to request documents that have been stolen and to publish those documents.” 

The trade secret claims were dismissed “with prejudice” as barred by the First Amendment and for failure to state a claim for which the relief sought could be granted. So, the only course open for the DNC is to request reconsideration or to appeal the decision.

Lesson:  Take reasonable measures to protect your trade secrets like encryption and training for those that have access to trade secret information. Keep track of your trade secrets and how the information came into your possession, how much it cost, and the measures taken to protect it.

​Read More