Patents and Trade Secrets: A Dual Strategy for Protecting Innovations
By adopting some best practices, each innovation can be catalogued and protected as a bundle of trade secrets and patents based on what rights each protects, how rights are preserved and enforced, and how assets are monetized.
April 17, 2023 at 10:00 AM
9 minute read
Many businesses, when looking to protect their innovation, often consider patent protection by default. However, this approach shortchanges other available and protectable intellectual property (IP) rights such as trade secrets. Rather, trade secrets and patents complement each other in a robust IP portfolio. By adopting some best practices, each innovation can be catalogued and protected as a bundle of trade secrets and patents based on what rights each protects, how rights are preserved and enforced, and how assets are monetized.
Best Practices for a Cohesive IP Strategy
In general, a patent is a public asset with a legally enforceable exclusionary right, making patents relatively easy to monetize and protect so long as the considerable expenses are paid and infringing activity is detectable. In contrast, a trade secret is cheap to obtain and maintain, has a potentially unlimited lifespan, and requires nothing more than maintaining the secrecy of the information. Its enforceability, however, is limited to protecting against others obtaining it via improper means.
This content has been archived.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 AllFirst-of-Its-Kind Parkinson’s Patch at Center of Fight Over FDA Approval of Generic Version
3 minute readIntellectual Property Lawyer of the Year Finalist: Ronald S. Bienstock
1 minute readMcCarter & English Acquires Connecticut IP Boutique Harrington & Smith
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1California Lawmakers Reach $50M Deal to Fund Legal Fights Against Trump
- 2Supreme Court Wrestles With Disabled Ex-Firefighter's Discrimination Case
- 3NJ Firm Narrowly Avoids Case Dismissal Over Lengthy Complaint Filed in Fed Court
- 4Arbitrators Under Fire for Allegedly Forcing Workers to 'Stay or Pay' Employers
- 5Plaintiff Narrowly Avoids Dismissal Over Lengthy Complaint Filed in Federal Court
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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