Perspectives from the General Counsel’s Office and · PDF file ·...
Transcript of Perspectives from the General Counsel’s Office and · PDF file ·...
CONFIDENTIAL© Copyright Baker Botts 2016. All Rights Reserved.
Perspectives from the General Counsel’s Office and Outside Counsel
Trade Secret Law Reboot
BAKER BOTTS
Speakers
Brian Campbell Vice President, Business & Legal Affairs and General Counsel, DHI Group, Inc. | New York
Mr. Campbell is responsible for managing DHI Group, Inc.'s legal affairs, including intellectual property,
mergers and acquisitions, strategic alliances, corporate securities, real estate, litigation and employment
law, as well as supervising outside counsel. Mr. Campbell also oversees DHI’s privacy initiatives.
Colm Dobbyn
Mr. Dobbyn has global responsibility for intellectual property (IP) and related technology legal matters for
MasterCard. He oversees a team of 15 professionals that handles MasterCard’s trademarks, patents,
copyrights, licensing and technology transfers on a worldwide basis. Prior to his employment with
MasterCard, Colm was previously Senior Counsel with PepsiCo, Inc., where he had responsibility for
trademark and related intellectual property matters for PepsiCo’s beverage divisions.
Dolly von Hollen
Ms. von Hollen oversees all trademark, patent, copyright, trade secret, and domain name issues for
Prudential Financial. Previously, she was an Assistant General Counsel with Nike, Inc. in Oregon, where she
was responsible for a variety of trademark, copyright, and domain matters. Dolly has practiced law in the
IP groups of several general practice and IP boutique firms in New York City.
2
General Counsel, Intellectual Property, MasterCard | New York
Vice President, Corporate Counsel for Intellectual Property, Prudential Financial | New Jersey
Rich HarperPartner, Baker Botts L.L.P. | New York
Mr. Harper is a trial partner in the New York office of Baker Botts. He represents public and private
companies in a broad range of complex commercial litigation and on corporate governance matters. Rich
has obtained dismissals, summary judgments and verdicts for his clients in significant commercial
litigation matters across a variety of sectors, including energy, media, technology, and consumer
products.
BAKER BOTTS
A "crash course" in trade secret law, including discussion of the recently-enacted
Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016.
Best practices for managing trade secret issues in vendor relationships and
employment agreements.
Strategies for what to do when there are trade secrets in the data room.
Trade Secret Law Overview
Proactive Management of Trade Secret Issues
Trade Secret Issues in Mergers and Acquisitions
Early steps to identify, assess, protect and defend trade secret rights.
Litigating Trade Secrets
01
02
03
04
3
PART
TRADE SECRET LAW OVERVIEW
01
4
BAKER BOTTS
Overview
• Historically protected under state, not federal, law
• Sources of Trade Secret Law
Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA) § 1.4:
o Any information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program,
device, method, technique or process, that: (i) derives independent
economic value, either actual or potential, from not being generally
known or readily ascertainable, and (ii) is the subject of efforts that
are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.
Non-UTSA states (NY, MA) apply the Restatement of Torts § 757:
o Any formula, pattern, device or compilation of information which is
used in one's business, and which gives him an opportunity to
obtain an advantage over competitors who do not know or use it.
5
BAKER BOTTS
Scope of Trade Secret Protection
• Broadly, trade secrets must be used in one's business,
provide some kind of commercial advantage, and of
course, be secret.
Secrecy is key: while there is no express originality or novelty
requirement, courts have required that a trade secret must meet
a certain level of novelty in order to be valid.
• A trade secret is a process or device for use in business
operations:
= Business Information = Formulas
= Compilations of Data = Computer Programs
= Devices = Methods, Techniques, Processes
6
BAKER BOTTS
Secrecy and Duration of Trade Secret Protection
• Absolute secrecy is not required, but information must be
secret from those who would use it commercially
– Confidential disclosure to employees, customers, licensees, etc.
does not necessarily terminate a trade secret
• Secrecy can depend on:
– Internal conduct - company's efforts to keep information secret
– External factors - independent discovery and disclosure by a
competitor will end protection
• Multiple competitors in an industry can independently
have trade secret rights in the same information
– But, it must remain secret: if one competitor discloses their trade
secret (i.e., in a patent), the others will lose trade secret protection
7
BAKER BOTTS
What Destroys Secrecy?
• Disclosure
– Revealing information publically, (trade shows, trade papers, etc.)
– Issuance of patent covering same information
– Advertisements or mass media
– Voluntary disclosures to the government, if statutes allow
government to reveal information
– Accidental disclosure
• Information readily available to those who would
commercially use it
– Theoretical availability not enough
– Easy and inexpensive means of discovery will end trade secret
protection
8
BAKER BOTTS
Elements of Trade Secret Claim
• Plaintiff must prove, by a preponderance of the
evidence:
Possession: Plaintiff possesses a trade secret;
Acquisition: Trade secret information was received
by Defendant (whether under contract, as part of a
confidential relationship, or unlawfully taken); and
Use: Defendant has used or disclosed Plaintiff's trade
secret information, to Plaintiff's detriment.
9
BAKER BOTTS
Possession of Trade Secrets
• Factors courts look to determine possession: Extent to which the information is known outside of the business;
Extent to which it is known by employees and others involved in the
business;
Extent of measures party takes to guard the secrecy of the information;
Value of the information to the party and its competitors;
Amount of effort and money spent in developing the information; and,
Ease/difficulty others could properly acquire/duplicate the information.
Hudson Hotels Corp. v. Choice Hotels Int’l., 995 F.2d 1173, 1175-76, n.1 (2d
Cir. 1993).
10
BAKER BOTTS
Acquisition (Misappropriation) of Trade Secrets
Misappropriation defined (UTSA § 1.2):i. acquisition of a trade secret of another by a person who knows or has
reason to know that the trade secret was acquired by improper means; or
ii. disclosure or use of a trade secret of another without express or implied
consent by a person who
A. used improper means to acquire knowledge of the trade secret; or
B. at the time of disclosure or use, knew or had reason to know that his
knowledge of the trade secret was
I. derived from or through a person who had utilized improper means to acquire it;
II. acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain its secrecy or limit
its use; or
III. derived from or through a person who owed a duty to the person seeking relief to
maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or
C. before a material change of his [or her] position, knew or had reason to know
that it was a trade secret and that knowledge of it had been acquired by
accident or mistake.11
BAKER BOTTS
Acquisition - "Proper" Means of Discovery
• Not all acquisition of claimed trade secret information is
improper.
• "Proper" means of discovery include:
Discovery by legitimate independent invention
Reverse engineering
Licensing arrangements
Published literature
12
BAKER BOTTS
Use of Trade Secrets
• Defined broadly:
Restatement (Third) Unfair Competition § 40, comment c: "any exploitation of the trade secret that is likely to result in
injury to the trade secret owner or enrichment to the defendant"
• Under UTSA § 1.2(i), improper acquisition can constitute
wrongful use.
• Absent improper acquisition, Plaintiff must prove
Defendant's use or disclosure (or the threat thereof) of
the trade secret.
• Plaintiff must show that claimed use or disclosure has
harmed or will harm Plaintiff.
13
BAKER BOTTS
Damages Remedies
• Damages may include
both:
– plaintiff's loss from
misappropriation
– defendant's unjust
enrichment, if not counted
in the plaintiff's loss
• UTSA allows plaintiff to
elect reasonable royalty
as an alternative measure
of damages
14
BAKER BOTTS
Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA)
• Amends Economic Espionage Act of 1996
• Permits DTSA claims to be brought in federal court (but
does not preempt state laws governing trade secrets)
• Trade secret definition similar to UTSA
• Relief
Civil seizure procedure
Injunctions
Actual damages
Exemplary damages (2x actuals)
Attorneys' fees15
BAKER BOTTS
Trade Secrets Versus Patents
16
Trade Secrets Patents
Length of Protection Potentially forever -- until
disclosure
20 years
Subject Matter Any data/information that
provides an advantage
over others in the
marketplace
Specific narrow subject
matter
Extent of Protection Protection only against
misappropriation
Ability to exclude
Protecting Information Vigilance and
maintenance of secrecy
Disclosure to public
domain
PART
PROACTIVE MANAGEMENT OF TRADE
SECRET ISSUES
02
17
BAKER BOTTS
Practical View from Inside the Company
• Exercise reasonable efforts to maintain secrecy
Preserve the information as substantially secret
Exercise reasonable precautions to ensure the information
remains secret
Restrict disclosure to those employees/contractors who actually
need to know the secret in order to perform their jobs/functions
Confidentiality agreements
Restrict access by others
Contractual provisions for employment or independent
contractor contracts, vendor agreements
• What do you do after the horse has left the barn?
18
INTERNAL: TRADE SECRETS AND
EMPLOYEES
119
BAKER BOTTS
The Issue: Departing Employees Pose Risks
• 85% of intellectual property thefts are committed by
employees or business partners.
• Half of employees admit to taking information from a
former employer and did not think it was wrong.
• Why?
Gain advantage for a competitor
Create a new business
Embarrass or retaliate
Simple ignorance
20
BAKER BOTTS
Policies to Identify and Protect Trade Secrets
• Limit employee access to trade secret information,
especially from home.
• Physical precautions:
Guards, surveillance, ID badges, sign-in
Physically segregate confidential information
Use "confidential" stamps on documents
Password protect critical documents
and trade secret information
Limit, monitor or restrict copying
Destroy drafts and copies
• Consider creating a trade secret registry (but there are
pros and cons).
21
BAKER BOTTS
Non-Disclosures in Employment Agreements
• Non-disclosures often “backstop” non-compete
agreements
• What information is “confidential” but not protected as a
“trade secret”
• Must be specific and narrowly tailored
• What is your company's secret formula?
• No disclosure or use
• Time period or until stale
22
BAKER BOTTS
Address People, Process, and Technology
• People Training and awareness
Segregation of duties
Appropriate levels of access
• Process Confidentiality and nondisclosure agreements
Exit interview and checklist
Policies
Periodic risk assessments or security audits
Documented security procedures
• Technology Work with CIO/IT Directors on solutions and vendor selection
23
BAKER BOTTS
Hiring New Employees
• Incoming employees can "contaminate" or "infect" a
business with trade secrets from a former employer
Require new hires to leave behind devices, documents, and other
information that their former employer considers confidential
Inform new hires of consequences of bringing in outside trade secret
information, up to and including dismissal
If a new hire will have access to trade secret information, have them sign
a non-disclosure agreement
24
24
BAKER BOTTS
Employee Training & Agreements
• Educate employees about proprietary information and
the value of maintaining secrecy
• Training or regular education on handling trade secret
information, especially electronic information
• Have employees sign a non-disclosure agreement
Written agreements should clearly state what information is
trade secret and what is not
Gives employer option to bring claim for breach of contract in
addition to claim for misappropriation of trade secrets
25
BAKER BOTTS
Departing Employees
• Exit interviews for departing employees
Remind them of continuing confidentiality obligations
Require them to return any trade secret materials, including
computers, phones, flash drives, documents, etc.
Ask them: "Do you have any company documents at home?
Have you returned all company devices? Did you store any files
on any personal flash drive/computer?"
If necessary, inspect and wipe phones or personal devices
26
EXTERNAL: TRADE SECRETS AND
VENDORS
27
BAKER BOTTS
Non-Disclosure Agreements
• Unlike covenants not to
compete, non-disclosure
agreements do not have
geographic limitations
• Courts may require non-
disclosure agreements be
reasonably limited in time and
subject matter
28
BAKER BOTTS
General Tips for Drafting Confidentiality/NDA
Agreements
• The agreement should put the reader on notice of the types of
information to which it applies
Define confidential information and trade secrets and indicate that
information may fall into these categories even if not marked
confidential
Clearly identify WHO owns the trade secrets
• Tailor the agreement to the company's business to increase the
likelihood it will be enforced
• Recite employee vendor’s recognition that company regards trade
secrets as valuable business assets to which considerable resources
have been devoted
• Consider whether the agreement should be one-way or mutual
• Provide for duration (limited) and termination
• Consider noncompete/nonsolicitation provisions
29
PART
TRADE SECRET ISSUES IN MERGERS
AND ACQUISITIONS
03
30
BAKER BOTTS
Three Trade Secret Issues for Discussion in the
Context of a Corporate Merger or Acquisition
1. What is necessary to ensure that you obtain the rights to trade secrets?
2. How should the parties approach due diligence issues?
3. What can happen if the parties fail to complete the merger or acquisition?
31
BAKER BOTTS
When Acquisition Negotiations Succeed: Drafting the
Acquisition Agreement to Obtain Trade Secret Rights
• The Setting Most target companies (especially smaller, private companies) do
not document their trade secrets
In practice, when identifying intellectual property rights in asset purchase agreements, most companies do not list them out by trade secret
The Acquirer naturally wants to obtain rights to all intellectual property (including trade secrets) with the ability to enforce those rights
• The Challenges Crafting the Asset Purchase Agreement language regarding
intellectual property rights
Addressing post-acquisition relationships with key employees who may have access to or knowledge of trade secrets
32
BAKER BOTTS
Chemetall Litigation (7th Cir. 2003)
• Chemetall acquired the assets of Morton International. After the acquisition,
Joseph Fraval left the company and formed a competitor. Chemetall, as the
successor to Morton, sued Fraval for violating a non-disclosure
agreement/employment contract.
• Fraval argued, in part, that it was not the intent of the parties to the
acquisition to assign to Chemetall the right to enforce Fraval’s employment
contract.
• The district court allowed that issue to go to the jury. Even though the
employment agreement “inured” to the benefit of Morton successors, the
asset purchase agreement said that no Morton employee would become an
employee of Chemetall and did not list his employment contract as one of
the assets being sold.
• The appellate court affirmed, finding that the intent of the parties was an
appropriate issue for the jury (and that nothing Fraval argued would support
ruling on the issue as a matter of law).
33
BAKER BOTTS
Due Diligence on a Target's Trade Secrets
• In order to gain access to a target's trade secrets as part of negotiations, the parties typically enter into a non-disclosure agreement: It protects the target's claim that it has taken adequate steps to protect its
claimed trade secrets
It protects the acquirer in helping to define what is not a trade secret
• Trade secret due diligence usually takes place under the larger umbrella of IP due diligence
• Due diligence check list items – try to obtain the following:
A schedule of all trade secrets
All trade secrets policies and procedures (Including security measures to protect)
Any valuation of trade secrets (often as part of a large IP valuation)
Agreements dealing with trade secrets, including licenses
Employee and vendor confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements
Correspondence regarding any trade secret disputes
34
BAKER BOTTS
When Acquisition Negotiations Fail: the
Importance of the Non-Disclosure Agreement
• Acquirer -- Patriot Rail Corp: A large national railroad holding company that purchased/operated shortline and regional freight railroads in the US.
• Target: Sierra Railroad Co: Operator of shortline railroads in Northern California, including profitable relationship with McClellan Air Force Base.
• 2005-2007: Patriot-Sierra had acquisition discussions under an NDA. Patriot got access to Sierra's confidential information, but promised to use it only for "evaluating and negotiating" the acquisition. As part of acquisition discussions, Sierra introduced Patriot to McClellan.
• In 2008, McClellan terminated its contract with Sierra, opened up a bid process for moving forward, and Patriot got the new contract.
35
BAKER BOTTS
The Sierra-Patriot Litigation
• Sierra's Claims included: Breach of Contract/NDA; Misappropriation of Trade Secrets; Tortious Interference with (Prospective) Contract; Unfair Competition
• What Happened?
Sierra won jury verdict for $20 million in damages
Sierra won punitive damages
Sierra then successfully obtained sanctions
• Lessons Learned:
What is our business strategy if the acquisition is not successful?
How much trade secret information do we need to see in order to value the company? In order to do the deal?
How long/under what circumstances can we agree to stay away form this area if the acquisition negotiations fail?
36
PART
LITIGATING TRADE SECRETS
04
37
BAKER BOTTS
Plaintiff: Immediate Issues to Consider
• What are the trade secrets in dispute?– Pleading requirements
– Competing interests: particularity versus secrecy
– Protective orders
• What (if any) records of the trade secrets exist in writing?– When were they reduced to writing? Before or after
contemplation of litigation?
• What record of efforts to keep trade secrets from being leaked to the public?
38
BAKER BOTTS
Defendant: Immediate Issues to Consider
• Evidence that subject matter is not a trade secret– Research prior art or other evidence that the subject matter is in
the public domain or readily ascertainable
• Information showing that the plaintiff did not adequately maintain secrecy of the claimed subject matter– Public disclosure: review patents, press releases, website,
publicly-available materials
• Records of independent development– Issue hold memos to relevant personnel to preserve evidence of
independent development
39
BAKER BOTTS
Maintaining Secrecy During Litigation
• Protective orders
• During discovery, who on the
litigation team gets access to trade
secret information?
– Outside counsel?
– In-house counsel?
– Client business people?
– Experts?
• Treatment of confidential information
during discovery and at trial
• Filing under seal
40
BAKER BOTTS
Early Motion Practice
• Plaintiff– Motion for Preliminary Injunction
• Goal: Prevent defendant from disclosing the information claimed as a trade secret into the public domain or to a competitor
• Defendant – Motion to Dismiss or for More Definite Statement
• Plaintiff's obligation to identify claims (trade secrets) with particularity
– Motion to Stay Discovery Pending Identification of Trade Secrets• Goals: Protect company information; prevent plaintiff from
modifying its claimed trade secrets
41
BAKER BOTTS
Should you hire a trade secret or damages
expert early in the litigation?
• Should the expert assist the plaintiff in "defining" its
trade secrets?
• What can a defendant's liability expert do to add
value early in the case?
• When can a damages expert be helpful in litigation?
42
BAKER BOTTS
Injunctive Remedies—Inevitable Disclosure
• PepsiCo v. Redmond, 54 F.3d
1262 (7th Cir. 1995):
Court may enjoin an employee
from taking new employment
where employee will inevitably
rely on former employer's trade
secrets
Redmond knew Pepsi's
marketing strategy, and the
court concluded Redmond
would rely on that secret
information in making decisions
for new employer
43
7th Cir. 1995
BAKER BOTTS
Injunctive Remedies—Inevitable Disclosure
• Factors courts consider include:
Level of competition between old and new employers
Similarity of employment
Value of trade secrets
Nature of the industry
Efforts by new employer to prevent disclosure
Bad faith
• Some courts have applied inevitable disclosure doctrine even in
absence of non-compete agreement
• Other courts have rejected inevitable disclosure doctrine since it
turns non-disclosure agreement into non-compete agreement
Whyte v. Schlage Lock Co., 125 Cal. Rptr. 2d 277 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002)
44
AUSTIN
BEIJING
BRUSSELS
DALLAS
DUBAI
HONG KONG
HOUSTON
LONDON
MOSCOW
NEW YORK
PALO ALTO
RIYADH
SAN FRANCISCO
WASHINGTON
bakerbotts.com
©Baker Botts L.L.P., 2016. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written
permission from Baker Botts L.L.P. is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and
clear credit is given with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.