Credit: Tashatuvango/Shutterstock.com What's Old Is New Again: Making the Case for Enhanced Trade Secrets Management
There is still significant and important work to be done with regard to how companies and IP practitioners handle both the identification and protection of trade secrets as well as the more cultural aspects of how and when IP policies are disseminated (and to whom) and the extent to which employees are trained on IP, and specifically, trade secret protection.
March 01, 2024 at 09:18 AM
9 minute read
Many of us in the trade secrets bar have long been proponents of enhanced trade secrets management. Especially with the enactment of the Defend Trade Secrets Act in 2016, the growing number of trade secrets cases being filed, the recognized increasing value of trade secrets in the eyes of businesses, and various new entrants to the market for managing and protecting trade secrets via technology (e.g., Tangibly) or insurance (e.g., Crown Jewel Insurance), it is easy to think that this message is getting through to businesses. In the last five to 10 years, several published studies from various sources showed abysmal rates for trade secrets management in companies globally. For example, a 2017 Baker & McKenzie study of more than 400 companies globally showed that only one third of companies, even large multinational companies, had taken comprehensive measures to protect trade secrets. And a 2019 study from Winston & Strawn of over 110 companies showed even more abysmal results, with less than 4% having formal trade secret protection policies and procedures. Surely, more than seven years later, things must have improved, right? Nope.
This content has been archived.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
© 2024 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 All
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Skips Over Sanctions in Talc Bankruptcy: 'That’s A No'
- 2Hit by Mail Truck: Man Agrees to $1.85M Settlement for Spinal Injuries
- 3Anticipating a New Era of 'Extreme Vetting,' Big Law Immigration Attys Prep for Demand Surge
- 4Deal Watch: What Dealmakers Are Thankful for in 2024
- 5'The Court Will Take Action': Judge Upbraids Combative Rudy Giuliani During Outburst at Hearing
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
