Why You Need to Act Now and Do More to Protect Your Trade Secrets
If you hadn't gotten that message, articles have been legion since the advent of COVID-19 about how businesses need to take steps during this time of widespread remote work to enhance their trade secret protection efforts.
June 19, 2020 at 01:27 PM
9 minute read
With the enactment in 2016 of the Defend Trade Secrets Act and corresponding increase in federal court trade secrets litigation, many high-profile trade secrets cases making headlines in recent years, such as Waymo v. Uber, initiatives like the federal government's crackdown on China backed trade secrets theft, as well as trends like the decimation of software and diagnostic medical testing patents in the wake of U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in Alice v. CLS Bank International, and the efforts by certain states and potentially even the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to cut back on the enforceability of restrictive covenants, it would be surprising if anyone were unaware of the increasing importance of trade secrets to all businesses. Indeed, if you hadn't gotten that message, articles have been legion since the advent of COVID-19 about how businesses need to take steps during this time of widespread remote work to enhance their trade secret protection efforts.
So why another article on enhanced measures to protect trade secrets? Because it appears that message still hasn't made it through to many businesses, and the many recent articles on this topic tend to focus primarily on enhancing cybersecurity and increasing employee training— not on developing protective measures that are sufficiently comprehensive enough to provide robust trade secrets protection. Traditional methods of trade secrets protection include employee agreements including noncompetes; cybersecurity; other confidentiality agreements including with business partners; and investigation and enforcement in the event of a suspected incident. In more recent times, as is evident in the many articles on protecting trade secrets during COVID-19, companies and their lawyers are aware that a certain amount of employee training is also required—to ensure that the employees are at least thinking about the need to protect trade secrets and to explain and promote the company policies and procedures with regard to physical and cyber protection. However, these measures—while important and necessary—are not alone sufficient for effective protection. Instead, a comprehensive trade secrets protection program that extends beyond the basics and draws upon interdisciplinary resources within the company, developing business processes and a culture around trade secrets protection, is required.
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 AllPa. Federal District Courts Reach Full Complement Following Latest Confirmation
The Defense Bar Is Feeling the Strain: Busy Med Mal Trial Schedules Might Be Phila.'s 'New Normal'
7 minute readFederal Judge Allows Elderly Woman's Consumer Protection Suit to Proceed Against Citizens Bank
5 minute readJudge Leaves Statute of Limitations Question in Injury Crash Suit for a Jury
4 minute readTrending Stories
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