2 Trade Secret A Subject Ma er 1 Secrecy 2 Economic Value B Ownership 1 Collaborations 2 Priority C Procedures D Infringement: Similarity

Transcription

1 Trade Secret

2 TRADE SECRET 2

3 2 Trade Secret The leading trade secret treatises are Roger M. Milgrim & Eric Bensen, Milgrim on Trade Secrets (Matthew Bender, on Lexis), Louis Altman & Malla Pollack, Callmann on Unfair Competition, Trademarks, and Monopolies (Thomson West, on Westlaw), and Melvin F. Jager, Trade Secrets Law (Thomson West, on Westlaw). The older Restatement (First) of Torts and the newer Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition are regularly cited. A Subject Matter Uniform Trade Secrets Act 1 Definitions

4 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 4 Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition 39 Definition of Trade Secret 1 Secrecy Most of this chapter is devoted to helping you understand this sentence. 312 F.3d 263 (7th Cir. 2002) 18 U.S.C United States v. Lange

5 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET

6 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 6 E = mc 2

7 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 7 Learning Curve Toys, Inc. v. PlayWood Toys, Inc. 342 F. 3d 714 (7th Cir. 2003) 765 ILCS 1065/1 et seq.

8 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 8

9 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 9

10 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 10

11 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 11

12 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 12 U.S. Pat. No. 5,454,513 On the facts as found by the jury, Wilson was not the inventor and the patent should not have issued. The relevant portions of the ITSA track the UTSA.

13 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 13

14 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 14

15 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 15

16 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 16 Milgrim 1.08[1]

17 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 17

18 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 18 Milgrim 1.05[4] Callmann Economic Value Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition 39 cmt. e 923 F. Supp (N.D. Cal. 1995) Religious Technology Center v. Netcom On-Line Communications Services, Inc.

19 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 19 Cal. Civ. Code et seq.

20 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 20 Wollersheim: 796 F.2d 1076 (9th Cir. 1986) Vien: 827 F. Supp. 629 (S.D. Cal. 1993) Clark: 453 F.2d 1006 (9th Cir.1972)

21 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 21 SmokEnders: 184 U.S.P.Q. 309 (S.D. Fla. 1974) Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition cmt. d

22 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 22

23 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 23

24 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 24 Restatement 39 cmt. f. Fishman: No (C.D. Cal. 1994)

25 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 25

26 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 26 Exploits Problem B Ownership 1 Collaborations Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition 42 Breach of Confidence by Employees

27 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 27

28 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 28 2 Priority C Procedures The Restatements treated reasonable efforts as part of the secrecy analysis. Under the UTSA, EEA, and DTSA, it is a separate element. 312 F.3d 263 (7th Cir. 2002) United States v. Lange

29 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 29 Rockwell Graphic Systems, Inc. v. DEV Industries, Inc. 925 F.2d 174 (7th Cir. 1991) Rockwell, which manufactures printing presses, sued DEV, a competing manufacturer, for making replacement parts for Rockwell presses. A key component of Rockwell s claims ws that DEV had in its possession about 100 piece part drawings : detailed manufacturing diagrams for parts to Rockwell presses. Rockwell alleged that the piece part drawings had been stolen by former Rockwell employees including Fleck and Peloso, both of whom were subequently employed by DEV. Along the way, DEV argued that Rockwell failed to make reasonable efforts to keep the diagrams secret, which led Judge Posner to discuss the purpose of the reasonable efforts requirement.

30 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 30

31 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 31 D Infringement: Similarity Big Vision Private, Ltd. v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co. 1 F. Supp. 3d 224 (S.D.N.Y. 2014)

32 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 32 E Infringement: Prohibited Conduct For more on the relationship between protection and infringement, see Mark A. Lemley & Mark P. McKenna, Scope, 57 Wm & Mary L. Rev (2016). 1 Proving Infringement No. 06 Civ (RJH), 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2011) Grynberg v. BP, PLC

33 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 33 Electro-Miniatures: 771 F.2d 23, 26 (2d Cir. 1985) Rochester Midland: No. 1:08-cv98, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46103, 2009 WL , *19 (W.D. Mich. June 1, 2009) 2 Direct Infringement Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition

34 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET Improper Acquisition of Trade Secrets Uniform Trade Secrets Act 1(1) Definitions 431 F.2d 1012 (5th Cir. 1970) Edmund Kitch, in The Law and Economics of Rights in Valuable Information, 9 J. Legal Stud. 683 (1980), speculates that "The appearance of the airplane at such an opportune moment [may have] suggested to DuPont that some kind of inside leak had tipped off the photographers (or their client) to the opportunity." E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. Christopher

35 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 35 Hyde: 314 S.W.2d 763 (Tex. 1958) Fowler: 316 S.W.2d 111 (Tex. Civ. App. 1958)

36 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 36

37 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 37 Kamin v. Kuhnau Would Christopher have been decided the same way if it were 2015 and the defendants used publicly available satellite photos from Google Earth to observe the the construction of the plant? What if they flew a small ten-pound remote-control drone over the plant? What if they flew the drone over their neighbor's fenced backyard and photographed him sunbathing nude? 374 P.2d 912 (Or. 1962)

38 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 38

39 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 39 McKinzie: 252 P.2d 564 (Or. 1953)

40 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 40 Hoeltke: 80 F.2d 912 (4th Cir. 1936)

41 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 41 3 Secondary Infringement Uniform Trade Secrets Act 1 Definitions

42 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 42 F Defenses For more, see Grynberg. Kewanee: 416 U.S. 470 (1974) Bonito Boats: 489 U.S. 14 (1989) Questions

43 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 43 Flaming Moe s Problem Locksmiths Problem Based on Mason v. Jack Daniel Distillery, 518 So.2d 130 (Ala. Ct. Civ. App. 1987) Based on Chicago Lock Co. v. Fanberg, 676 F.2d 400 (9th Cir. 1982)

44 CHAPTER 2. TRADE SECRET 44