Trade secret pirates and IP thieves cost the U.S. billions
I recently spoke with Gary Lincenberg, principal at Bird Marella and former assistant U.S. attorney about economic espionage.
November 04, 2013 at 07:33 AM
7 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
While the patent war among high-tech companies (and, often, patent trolls) takes up a lot of the headlines these days, intellectual property theft comes in many different shapes and sizes. The theft of trade secrets and other forms of economic espionage are serious problems for U.S. companies, and there are major economic consequences that result from this wrongdoing.
I recently spoke with Gary Lincenberg, principal at Bird Marella and former assistant U.S. attorney, about this topic. He spoke of economic espionage and how companies often must fend for themselves with civil suits. This is partly due to the fact that, since much of this criminal activity originates overseas, it is difficult to prosecute, and it is often unclear if the wrongdoer can be extradited.
But, says Lincenberg, as U.S. treaties with foreign governments strengthen and our ability to capture information from the cloud improves, we will be less dependent on traditional subpoenas to get hard copies of documents. This means that barriers are diminishing and politicians will soon be in favor of reallocating Department of Justice resources to fight espionage, since these crimes hurt the national economy.
For inside counsel, there are a number of questions that stem from economic espionage. When you have suspicion of a threat, how do you go about gathering evidence? Do you launch a civil suit or obtain outside counsel? When should you alert the government, and which agency do you alert? How do you assemble a case to present to them?
Lincenberg discussed several cases he knew intimately. In one example, in the hospitality industry, a worker left a large company to go to a competitor. The previous employer feels he took intellectual property with him in the form of his knowledge and skills, but the U.S. attorney declined to prosecute. Employees are portable, after all, and this would have ramifications on employee movement. What workers have in their minds is the foundation companies build on, and the business in question was attempting to use the U.S. attorney as a cudgel, but this turned out to be nothing more than a case of alleged domestic espionage.
In another example, an aerospace industry company called Lincenberg. The company had camera footage of an employee sneaking into an office after hours and taking materials home from a design drawer. The employee in question was in communication with foreign nationals. Lincenberg had to decide whether to take the case to the federal or state authorities. He decided to do both. He knew the federal government had broader powers and would do a thorough job, but he felt he needed to get in a quick hit. The DA went forward, got a quick arrest and prosecution, and the wrongdoer was sentenced to prison time. While a federal case could have resulted in a longer sentence, Lincenburg had to decide how to proceed to get the best result in the shortest amount of time.
For more stories on this topic, check out the following:
IP: Battling against foreign trade secret theft
A primer on 4 notorious recent cyber-attacks
Ex-Motorola employee gets four years for trade-secret theft
While the patent war among high-tech companies (and, often, patent trolls) takes up a lot of the headlines these days, intellectual property theft comes in many different shapes and sizes. The theft of trade secrets and other forms of economic espionage are serious problems for U.S. companies, and there are major economic consequences that result from this wrongdoing.
I recently spoke with Gary Lincenberg, principal at
But, says Lincenberg, as U.S. treaties with foreign governments strengthen and our ability to capture information from the cloud improves, we will be less dependent on traditional subpoenas to get hard copies of documents. This means that barriers are diminishing and politicians will soon be in favor of reallocating Department of Justice resources to fight espionage, since these crimes hurt the national economy.
For inside counsel, there are a number of questions that stem from economic espionage. When you have suspicion of a threat, how do you go about gathering evidence? Do you launch a civil suit or obtain outside counsel? When should you alert the government, and which agency do you alert? How do you assemble a case to present to them?
Lincenberg discussed several cases he knew intimately. In one example, in the hospitality industry, a worker left a large company to go to a competitor. The previous employer feels he took intellectual property with him in the form of his knowledge and skills, but the U.S. attorney declined to prosecute. Employees are portable, after all, and this would have ramifications on employee movement. What workers have in their minds is the foundation companies build on, and the business in question was attempting to use the U.S. attorney as a cudgel, but this turned out to be nothing more than a case of alleged domestic espionage.
In another example, an aerospace industry company called Lincenberg. The company had camera footage of an employee sneaking into an office after hours and taking materials home from a design drawer. The employee in question was in communication with foreign nationals. Lincenberg had to decide whether to take the case to the federal or state authorities. He decided to do both. He knew the federal government had broader powers and would do a thorough job, but he felt he needed to get in a quick hit. The DA went forward, got a quick arrest and prosecution, and the wrongdoer was sentenced to prison time. While a federal case could have resulted in a longer sentence, Lincenburg had to decide how to proceed to get the best result in the shortest amount of time.
For more stories on this topic, check out the following:
IP: Battling against foreign trade secret theft
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGOP Now Holds FTC Gavel, but Dems Signal They'll Be a Rowdy Minority
6 minute readLongtime Purdue GC Accused of Drunken Driving Hires Big-Name Defense Attorney
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1DC Lawsuits Seek to Prevent Mass Firings and Public Naming of FBI Agents
- 2Growth of California Firms Exceeded Expectations, Survey of Managing Partners Says
- 3Blank Rome Adds Life Sciences Trio From Reed Smith
- 4Divided State Supreme Court Clears the Way for Child Sexual Abuse Cases Against Church, Schools
- 5From Hospital Bed to Legal Insights: Lessons in Life, Law, and Lawyering
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250