Observers following the legal issues surrounding the prosecution of David Nosal will be watching closely in 2015 as the former Korn Ferry executive returns to the Ninth Circuit to appeal his 2013 conviction on three counts of violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. READ MORE
The European Union appears poised to enact a sweeping new legal regime that would harmonize trade secrets law across all member states.
It’s been a year since we wrote about a new EU proposal to regulate trade secret protection. Then, at the end of November 2013, the EU published its first draft proposal for a Directive on the protection of trade secrets.In May of this year, the Council of the European Union agreed on a revised draft Directive. (In contrast to European Regulations, European Directives do not apply directly as member states’ law, but only give objectives that the Member States must achieve within a specified time limit in order to harmonize their various national rules. This means that, in fact, trade secrets rules will not be “unified” but rather “similar” across the Continent.)
New amendments to Russian law take aim at the theft of trade secrets by employees, with especially tough penalties for thieving CEOs.
The amendments to Russia’s Trade Secret Law became effective October 1, 2014. The goal of these amendments is to increase the protection of trade secrets by stiffening penalties for unauthorized disclosures by employees.
READ MORE
Ah, what would corporations give to be able to have trade secret protections for their information simply by declaring it a trade secret? For oil refineries in California, that dream may now be a reality.
On September 20, 2014, Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 1300 into law. The bill requires oil refineries in California to report information about all scheduled shutdowns and other maintenance for the upcoming calendar year to the Division of Occupational Safety and Health by September 15 of each year. The bill also expands the definition of trade secrets as it applies to oil refineries and permits oil refineries to identify as trade secrets “all or a portion of the information submitted” under the bill if they believe that the information “may involve the release of a trade secret.”
READ MORE
The Trade Secrets Act of 2014 (H.R. 5233) was introduced in the House by Congressman George Holding on July 29, 2014. Representatives Steve Chabot (R-OH), Howard Coble (R-NC), John Conyers (D-MI), Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), and Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), are cosponsors of the bill.
While the House Bill is very similar to the Bill introduced in the Senate on April 29, 2014 Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2014 (DTSA) (S. 2267), there are some major differences between the two. Specifically, the House Bill is much more protective of defendants facing ex parte seizure orders. READ MORE
With a powerful industrial coalition lining up behind them, two senators are trying yet again to establish a federal right of civil action for trade secret misappropriation, potentially making trade secrets an IP stepchild no more.
Sens. Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) introduced the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2014 on April 29. As we reported in February (and as picked up today by the LegalTimes), Sen. Coons was then circulating a draft; by recruiting Sen. Hatch as a co-sponsor, he can now tout the bill’s bipartisan support. Moreover, both are members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which might help the bill’s odds of survival. READ MORE
On April 10, 2014, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick proposed a bill entitled “An Act to Promote Growth and Opportunity.” Under this lengthy bill, Massachusetts would finally adopt the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, to which only it and New York currently do not adhere. But the provisions of the bill relating to non-competition agreements are what have received the most attention from the businesses community.
Under the proposed legislation, with the aim of increasing mobility of labor, non-competition agreements between Massachusetts employers and employees or independent contractors would be impermissible and void: READ MORE
Revised post available here.
There are stirrings in the U.S. Senate of yet another bid to establish a federal right of civil action for trade secret misappropriation.
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) has quietly circulated a draft bill to IP lawyers and others with an interest in the legislation. The draft Protecting American Trade Secrets and Innovation Act of 2014 (“PATSIA 2014”) is the latest of several recent attempts to bring about this right. The past attempts include Sen. Coons’ own prior iteration of the bill, PATSIA 2012 (S. 3389), which never made it out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. READ MORE
Earlier this year, we picked mandatory public disclosure laws as a trend to watch in 2014. Developments in California seem to bear that out, and trade secrets owners will want to keep a close eye on the “green chemistry” movement and expanded public disclosure requirements for manufacturers of a wide range of consumer products. Companies that make or sell products in California — ranging from electronics and household cleaners to children’s toys and cosmetics — will need to map out a plan that complies with the new requirements while at the same time protecting their valuable intellectual property, including trade secrets. READ MORE
It’s been a hot year in the trade secrets field, with some huge verdicts and settlements, a renewed spotlight on cyberattacks, and an unusual flurry of trade secrets legislation. Trade Secrets Watch’s 2013 Year-in-Review highlights the notable trade secrets activity from the past year. READ MORE
