In addition to traditional compensatory damages, a plaintiff may obtain unjust enrichment damages or royalties from the defendant. at 1136.ĭTSA permits harmed companies to seek damages for “any actual loss caused by the misappropriation of the trade secret.” § 1836(b)(3)(B)(i)(I). The court ruled these facts sufficient to sustain a preliminary injunction barring the defendant from disclosing or using any of the plaintiff’s secrets and soliciting the company’s clients. The employee planned to use the data to solicit the plaintiff’s customers while working for another company. The order came after an employee stole emails containing privileged information: financial forecasts, budgets, profit margin data, and customer lists. Furstenau, a court found that the plaintiff, a logistics company, was entitled to injunctive relief. Any injunction may not prevent the defendant from “entering into an employment relationship with another,” nor may it contradict any state laws “prohibiting restraints on the practice of a lawful profession, trade, or business.” §§ 1836(b)(3)(A)(i)(I)–(II). Yet the court may deny the injunction, but allow the defendant to use the trade secret if they pay a “reasonable royalty” for a specified period of time. Such an injunction requires the defendant to take affirmative action to protect the secret. on such terms as the court deems reasonable.” § 1836(b)(3)(A)(i). However, where these protections fail, remedies are available.Ī court may grant an injunction “to prevent any actual or threatened misappropriation. In previous articles ( here and here), we discussed how companies can legally and practically protect themselves from industrial espionage. Industrial espionage refers to various activities performed to gain an unfair competitive advantage, including the theft of trade secrets. In extreme cases, parties may seek an ex parte seizure to prevent the misuse of stolen trade secrets. Thus, victimized individuals or corporations whose trade secrets were stolen may seek an injunction, monetary damages, or attorneys’ fees. The Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (the “DTSA”) amends the Act to include a civil cause of action for the misappropriation of trade secrets. Section 1832 of the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 (the “Act”) criminalizes the theft of trade secrets “intended for use in interstate or foreign commerce, to the economic benefit of anyone other than the owner.” 18 U.S.C. The authors would like to thank Thomas Fogarty and Anya Bharat Ram for their contributions to this post. By Matthew Wagner, Colin Jennings, Benjamin Glassman and Vipal Patel on JPosted in Courts, cybersecurity, Data Protection & Privacy, Intellectual Property, Sanctions, Technology, United States
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |