9/30/2017 0 Comments Amcor Air Processor 2000 ManualACE is a market leader in electrostatic systems, web and sheet cleaners, dust extractors for tissue paper, and vertical washing machines for the corrugated industry. A reserve currency (or anchor currency) is a currency that is held in significant quantities by governments and institutions as part of their foreign exchange reserves. Understanding and Litigating Trade Secrets, Jenner & Block Practice Series. To view this article you need a PDF viewer such as Adobe Reader. If you can't read this PDF, you can view its text here. Go back to the PDF. Practice Series UNDERSTANDING AND LITIGATING TRADE SECRETS An Outline For Analyzing The Statutory And Common Law Of Trade Secrets In Illinois DEBBIE L. BERMAN APRIL A. OTTERBERG JUSTIN A. Browse our quotes collection, once you found your desired one, create beautiful quote as image and share on Facebook, Twitter & Pinterest. Join the NASDAQ Community today and get free, instant access to portfolios, stock ratings, real-time alerts, and more! Join Today. Introduction. Please note that most of these Brand Names are registered Trade Marks, Company Names or otherwise controlled and their inclusion in this index is. MALESON ABRAHAM M. SALANDER AARON J. HERSH © 2. 01. 7 Jenner & Block LLP All Rights Reserved JENNER & BLOCK LLP OFFICES ▪ 3. North Clark Street Chicago, Illinois 6. Firm: 3. 12 2. 22- 9. Fax: 3. 12 5. 27- 0. Third Avenue, 3. 7th Floor New York, New York 1. Firm: 2. 12 8. 91- 1. Fax: 2. 12 8. 91- 1. West 5th Street Suite 3. Los Angeles, California 9. Firm: 2. 13 2. 39- 5. Fax: 2. 13 2. 39- 5. New York Avenue, NW Suite 9. Washington, D. C. Firm: 2. 02 6. 39- 6. Fax: 2. 02 6. 39- 6. Old Broad Street London EC2. N 1. HQ United Kingdom Firm: +4. Fax: +4. 4 (0) 3. WEBSITE ▪ www. jenner. AUTHOR INFORMATION ▪ DEBBIE L. BERMAN ▪ APRIL A. OTTERBERG Partner Partner Tel: 3. Tel: 3. 12 8. 40- 8. Fax: 3. 12 8. 40- 7. Fax: 3. 12 8. 40- 8. E- Mail: dberman@jenner. E- Mail: aotterberg@jenner. JUSTIN A. MALESON ▪ ABRAHAM M. SALANDER Partner Associate Tel: 3. Tel: 3. 12 8. 40- 7. Fax: 3. 12 8. 40- 8. Fax: 3. 12 8. 40- 7. E- Mail: jmaleson@jenner. E- Mail: asalander@jenner. AARON J. HERSH Associate Tel: 3. Fax: 3. 12 5. 27 0. E- Mail: ahersh@jenner. INTRODUCTION TO 2. EDITION Since the first edition of this outline was published in 2. Illinois case law addressing the protection of confidential and trade secret information has continued to develop, particularly in the area of restrictive covenants. In addition to addressing that area of the law, this third edition contains updated case law references throughout the outline and adds new information, including about the 2. Defend Trade Secrets Act, the evolving jurisprudence concerning restrictive covenants in employment relationships in Illinois, the varied approaches of different states toward the doctrine of inevitable disclosure of trade secrets, the intersection between claims for misappropriation of trade secrets and other common law and statutory causes of action, and the protection of social media content. We wish to thank former Jenner & Block attorneys Dan Winters, James A. Mc. Kenna, David K. Haase, and Matt T. Albaugh for their substantial assistance in developing and creating this outline. We also thank the other attorneys and summer associates, including William T. Wall and Jennifer K. Mindrum, who assisted in researching and drafting this outline. Debbie L. Berman April A. Otterberg Justin A. Maleson Abraham M. Salander Aaron J. Hersh JENNER & BLOCK LLP June 2. PREFACE In today’s sophisticated business world, managing and protecting confidential information can be critical to remaining competitive in the marketplace. Although companies have a number of statutory and common- law protections for their proprietary information, those protections have limits. For example, a company can protect against use of information by obtaining a patent, but patents are limited in duration, and the idea must meet certain novelty standards. Similarly, a company may require its key employees to sign restrictive covenants that prevent the employees from working for its competitors and thereby disclosing confidential information, but courts will not enforce such agreements indefinitely. By contrast, trade secret protection—the subject of this outline—is available so long as the information is secret and the subject of reasonable steps to maintain secrecy. Thus, trade secret laws may be able to protect a business’s most valuable information, long after other protections have become unavailable. The Illinois Trade Secrets Act (“ITSA”), modeled on the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, governs trade secrets in Illinois. Trade secret owners have brought claims under the Act under numerous fact patterns, including: an employee who stole confidential files before leaving the company to start his own business, an employee who memorized data from a customer list and then provided the data to a competitor, or an entity that breached a non- disclosure agreement and used the plaintiff’s ideas to develop its own product. In this outline, we analyze the complex body of Illinois statutory and decisional case law addressing the protection of confidential and trade secret information. We also provide practical suggestions for counseling clients and defending or prosecuting trade secret misappropriation claims. In Section I, we address what information can be protected as a trade secret and the reasonable steps a plaintiff must take to protect the secrecy of its information if it hopes to obtain trade secret protection. In Section II, we discuss the various acts that constitute misappropriation of a trade secret. Section III concerns the use of trade secrets giving rise to liability, including the concepts of threatened use and inevitable disclosure of trade secrets. Section IV considers the remedies available under ITSA. Section V addresses practice and procedure issues, focusing on those unique to trade secrets claims. Section VI identifies causes of action that plaintiffs often bring in addition to ITSA claims, and discusses the relationship between ITSA and those other claims, including the extent to which ITSA preempts other claims. Finally, Section VII highlights issues involved in obtaining insurance coverage in relation to trade secrets. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. WHAT IS A TRADE SECRET UNDER ILLINOIS LAW? A. Definition of a Trade Secret........................................... Statutory definition. The information must be sufficiently secret. The owner must derive value from the information’s secrecy. The owner must take reasonable steps to maintain the information’s secrecy.................................... ITSA’s variances from the Uniform Trade Secrets Act.......... Trade secrets under the Illinois common law. The Restatement’s six- factor analysis. Illinois courts retain the common law six- factor analysis. The existence of a trade secret is a question of fact.................. Use by the owner is not required. Being the first or only one to use the information is not sufficient. The time, effort, and money expended may be relevant............... Whether a trade secret exists involves a balancing of interests. B. Specific Categories of Trade Secrets. Customer lists............................................... Public availability and the cost of compilation of the customer list information frequently determine trade secret status......... The size and nature of the plaintiff’s business may affect whether the customer list is protected...................... The nature of the goods the plaintiff sells may affect trade secret protection....................................... The size and content of a customer list may affect whether the list is subject to trade secret protection. Whether the former employee had a prior relationship with customers on the list may affect trade secret protection. Whether a purchased customer list is protected is fact- specific. Pricing information, pricing formula, and profit margin. Prices charged are generally denied trade secret protection. Pricing formula unknown to the public may qualify as a trade secret. Price differentials and net profits.......................... Computer software.......................................... Trade secret misappropriation is not an exclusive claim........ The unique nature of the software may be relevant............ Programmers may not use software from a former employer to write source code. Product drawings, schematics, specifications, and blueprints. The ease or difficulty of reverse engineering is a factor........ Reverse engineering may not be a defense, if the defendant actually used the drawing or blueprint...................... Artists’ concepts are generally not protectible................ Process – method of combining various elements.................. Product models............................................. Product designs. ............................................ Implementation of an original design does not guarantee trade secret protection....................................... Design information may not be afforded trade secret protection where the information was learned from a non- fiduciary thirdparty. Product formula. ............................................ Expertise versus an employee’s general skills and experience......... Internal business information and compilations. Compilations of confidential business and financial information may constitute trade secrets. Identification of an already established niche market is not a trade secret. No protectible interest in identity of hired employees.......... Social media content......................................... C. Acceptable Steps for Maintaining Information’s Secrecy. The steps taken must be reasonable, but need not be perfect. A court may consider a failure to enforce known violations of confidentiality agreements as a failure to reasonably protect trade secrets.................................................... Whether the steps taken were reasonable is a question of fact. The size and resources of the information’s owner are relevant in determining reasonable steps to protect secrecy.................... Smaller businesses are not expected to take expensive steps to protect secrecy. Larger businesses are held to higher standards for protecting secrecy.............................................. Specific steps to protect secrecy. Employee nondisclosure agreements and training............. Precautions against third- party misuse. Limits on access to confidential information................. Use of a “confidential” or “trade secret” label................ Other measures........................................ II. MISAPPROPRIATION................................................... A. Definition. .......................................................
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
October 2017
Categories |