Education comes at a price. But not this time. Beck Reed Riden is making available its Ten Minute Trade Secret Training Series videos freely available - and available for free. With the FTC rule banning noncompetes on the horizon and more states limiting the use of noncompetes, it is now more imperative than ever before that companies and employees take steps to protect their trade secrets, other confidential information, and customer relationships.
Episode 22 of Fairly Competing is out! Join us for a discussion of some practical problems with the Defend Trade Secrets Act, John Marsh’s ideas for amendments to fix them, and our plan to try to make the fixes happen.
Once again, we have resounding unanimity on the issues and recommendations to the FTC, as they consider whether to move forward with their plan to ban noncompetes, as well as some nondisclosure agreements and other restrictive covenants. Over 100 lawyers who practice extensively in the area of trade secret and restrictive covenant law agree: federal regulation is likely inappropriate, definitely premature, and, in any event, should be limited.
If you want to see how ChatGPT can affect the practice of law, we have an example of a cease and desist letter inspired by the style of the beloved Dr. Seuss.
Our updated graph of noncompete, trade secret, and DTSA decisions is now available. Noncompete decisions remain level, while trade secret decisions continue to trend up.
Given that good CLE programs can be hard to identify, I put together a list of a few upcoming, content-rich programs that I and leading practitioners, in-house counsel, experts, and others from around the country are participating in.
While most people reading this blog will know that California has a statute that bans noncompetes, it may come as a surprise that employers have dealt with that prohibition by turning to trade secret law for protection as far back as 1913 — even for low-level employees.
Our legal system is far from perfect. And, unfortunately, it frequently permits abuses. In the context of restrictive covenants and trade secret claims, oftentimes it’s an overly-aggressive forme...
Our updated graph of noncompete and trade secrets decisions is now available. Noncompete decisions remain level, while trade secret decisions continue to trend up.
Episode 14 of Fairly Competing is out! Join John, Ben, and Russell for a discussion with special guest Vicki Cundiff about irreparable harm in trade secret disputes.
Over 50 percent of employees admit stealing company information when they leave for a new job. It’s this “insider threat” that keeps us up at night. To help combat it, we have updated and reissued our training, Protecting Trade Secrets While Working From Home, with improved audio and additional substance.
You hired someone from a competitor. You’re excited. They’re excited. But you may have bought yourself a lawsuit. Can you avoid it? Maybe.
Once again, we have resounding unanimity on the issues and recommendations to the FTC and DOJ, as they consider whether to regulate (and if so, how) noncompetes, nondisclosure agreements, and other restrictive covenants. 70 lawyers who practice extensively in the area of trade secret and restrictive covenant law agree: federal regulation is likely inappropriate, definitely premature, and, in any event, should be limited.
As regular readers of this blog know, I focus on providing content and rarely suggest educational programs to attend. However, given that CLE programs are still remote and can be hard to identify, I t...
About twice a year, I update my chart of reported noncompete and trade secrets decisions. The results continue the trend: While noncompete litigation appears to have largely leveled off over the last 15-plus years, trade secret litigation continues to reflect an overall upward trajectory.
Misconceptions about noncompetes abound. And, as noncompete agreements are increasingly in the cross-hairs of the media and legislators, it has become increasingly clear that some of the most vocal de...
The Supreme Court’s decision in Van Buren is out. The Court took a narrow view on the scope of the CFAA, resolving key aspects of the circuit split, and eliminating the concern that every breach of fiduciary duties by an employee or violation by an employee of the terms of their employer’s computer use policy can be a criminal act.
As regular readers of this blog know, I focus on providing content and rarely suggest programs to attend. However, given that CLE programs are still remote and can be hard to identify, I thought I’d take a moment to call out a few upcoming, content-rich programs. Take a look.
The Business Litigation Session (the “BLS”) of the Massachusetts Superior Court just issued a decision on the scope of preemption under Massachusetts “new” (effective October 1, 2018) trade secret law, the Massachusetts Uniform Trade Secrets Act (sometimes referred to as “MUTSA,” and other times as “MTSA”). See what it says.
About twice a year, I update my chart of reported noncompete and trade secrets decisions. As regular readers of this blog know, a little over a decade ago, I became curious to see how many reported trade secret and noncompete decisions were issued each year in all of the federal and state courts around the country. So, I did a “back of the envelope” calculation. I have performed similar calculations every year since. Here is the latest.
A few days ago, I posted a long article on President-elect Biden’s proposed national partial ban of noncompetes and what to do about it: President Biden’s Proposed Ban of (Most) Noncompetes: Protection Strategies and Steps to Take Now.
To long? Here’s the summary.
To long? Here’s the summary.
Protecting trade secrets, confidential business information, goodwill, and any other recognized legitimate business interests does not happen by accident. Companies need to plan. And, when one of the key tools is taken away (i.e., noncompetes), they need to look more closely at the remaining options to ensure they have the protections they need and that fit their circumstances. We discuss them in this post.
The split in the Circuits over the scope of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act is up at the U.S. Supreme Court today. The issue: Whether a person who is authorized to access information on a computer for certain purposes violates Section 1030(a)(2) of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act if he accesses the same information for an improper purpose.
Trade secret misappropriation is not a matter of degree. Either the defendant acquired, used, or disclosed information or he did not.