Live data from Hacker News

When the Judge Distrusts Your Lawyers

masslawblog.com

11–20 of 89 posts

Re: When the Judge Distrusts Your Lawyers

#11
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's technically a type of intellectual property, like a patent. If no agreements are in place, it's still infringement.

Is that really true? Is there something I can read for a better understanding?

""" ...a trade secret is information that:

* Is not generally known to the public;

* Confers some sort of economic benefit on its holder (where this benefit must derive specifically from its not being publicly known, not just from the value of the information itself);

* Is the subject of reasonable efforts to maintain its secrecy. """

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_secret

None of those criteria requires a contract or even an explicit label, but some sort of agreement is certainly easier to defend in court, if the need arises. Likewise, trademarks don't technically need to be registered or even claimed, but they do need to be enforced. If you open source your trade secrets or let stores sell generic "Cheerios", then you have a weak claim if you ever need to bring someone to court.

Gratuitous: I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, etc.

Re: When the Judge Distrusts Your Lawyers

#12
> Uber has a team dedicated to collecting trade secrets from competing companies. Allegedly, the people involved use disappearing-message apps, anonymous servers, and secret computers and phones to communicate without leaving a trail.

If true, then this is absolutely unreal.

Add it to the growing list of dodgy Uber tactics:

Ride-hailing company (Uber) hit by revelations it used custom-built tool to deceive law enforcement, while latest departure of senior staffer deepens troubles https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/03/uber-secr...

Uber employees have ordered and canceled more than 5,000 rides from rival Lyft since last October, according to new data provided by Lyft. http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/11/technology/uber-fake-ride-re...

CNNMoney spoke to three Uber drivers who said they received a text message that said they were "forbidden" from driving with another company. http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/04/technology/uber-lyft/?iid=EL

Uber admitted on Tuesday that it underpaid its New York City-based drivers by millions of dollars over the past two and a half years https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/23/15681422/uber-underpaid-n...

Uber will stop its controversial practice of tracking users for up to five minutes after a trip has ended, as it attempts to turn around its mired public image. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/29/uber-u-tu...

Uber’s Hell program used fake passenger accounts to track the location and status of Lyft drivers. http://www.newsweek.com/uber-used-hell-program-track-lyft-dr...

Re: When the Judge Distrusts Your Lawyers

#13
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's technically a type of intellectual property, like a patent. If no agreements are in place, it's still infringement.

Is that really true? Is there something I can read for a better understanding?

The feds adopted a Trade Secrets Act in 2016. [0] But many states have had versions of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, starting in 1979.[1]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defend_Trade_Secrets_Act

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Trade_Secrets_Act

Re: When the Judge Distrusts Your Lawyers

#14

Could anyone explain why trade secrets are something you can sue over if no NDAs or similar have been signed?

Could anyone explain why trade secrets are something you can sue over if no NDAs or similar have been signed?

A. (the sarcastic answer)

The USPTO explains the reasoning here:

https://www.uspto.gov/patents-getting-started/international-...

As that page makes clear, it's now a federal offense to misappropriate trade secrets because:

"As a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and a party to the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual-Property Rights (TRIPS), the United States is obligated to provide trade secret protection. Article 39 paragraph 2 requires member nations to provide a means for protecting information that is secret, commercially valuable because it is secret, and subject to reasonable steps to keep it secret. The Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 created federal civil cause of action, strengthening U.S. trade secret protection, with a choice for the parties between localized disputes under state laws or disputes under federal law, heard in federal courts. While state laws differ, there is similarity among the laws because almost all states have adopted some form of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. "

If for some reason you need a deeper explanation (although I'm already getting a bit suspicious as to what legitimate reason you might or might not have), that page links to a helpful Youtube video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dXA5A4l0Rg

While unfortunate that the USPTO has no way to distribute video information without relying on its industry partners to help get the message out[1], the video clarifies that "The failure to identify and protect trade secrets can result in a loss of competitive advantage, loss of core business technologies, and reduced profitability. In many countries the importance of trade secrets is reflected in laws and regulations that protect against trade secret theft because of the impact it can have on the economic vitality of businesses."

Egad, the specter of "reduced profitability" and the loss of "economic vitality"! Underlying this important message are a series of cartoons subconsciously illustrating the principle that without federal protection of trade secrets, the recipe for the "World's Best Cookie's" would quickly be stolen by foreigners with funny looking facial hair, and then we would no longer have cookies.

Any other questions?

B. (the non-sarcastic answer)

Because businesses with lots of money gave some of that money to politicians to create laws allowing them to use the muscle of the federal government to preserve the competitive advantages they already have. Trade secrets are to patents roughly as the DMCA is to copyright: they add a layer of federal felony to what would otherwise be a civil dispute.

[1] Even the interstitial makes me gag: "You are leaving USPTO.gov. We provide this link to an outside website because it has information that may be of interest to users. The USPTO does not necessarily endorse the views or facts presented on this site. The USPTO does not endorse any commercial products that may be advertised or available on this site." They make the video, post it on an external website, and then say that are linking to an external website because it might be of interest to users? And what compelled them to say "does not necessarily endorse"? You really should watch the video, though, as its "smarminess" is almost beyond words.

Re: When the Judge Distrusts Your Lawyers

#15

> Uber has a team dedicated to collecting trade secrets from competing companies. Allegedly, the people involved use disappearing-message apps, anonymous servers, and secret computers and phones to communicate without leaving a trail. If true, then this is absolutely unreal. Add it to the growing list of dodgy Uber tactics: Ride-hailing company (Uber) hit by revelations it used custom-built tool to deceive law enforc…

When I hear stories like this I think of the developers who likely thought of and implemented the systems behind these criminal acts and I'm once more reminded that software developers, in aggregate, are on a similar level to '90s finance "tricksters" etc. We'll do whatever if the money is there.

Re: When the Judge Distrusts Your Lawyers

#16

> Uber has a team dedicated to collecting trade secrets from competing companies. Allegedly, the people involved use disappearing-message apps, anonymous servers, and secret computers and phones to communicate without leaving a trail. If true, then this is absolutely unreal. Add it to the growing list of dodgy Uber tactics: Ride-hailing company (Uber) hit by revelations it used custom-built tool to deceive law enforc…

When I hear stories like this I think of the developers who likely thought of and implemented the systems behind these criminal acts and I'm once more reminded that software developers, in aggregate, are on a similar level to '90s finance "tricksters" etc. We'll do whatever if the money is there.

It all comes to personal ethics.

Re: When the Judge Distrusts Your Lawyers

#17

> Uber has a team dedicated to collecting trade secrets from competing companies. Allegedly, the people involved use disappearing-message apps, anonymous servers, and secret computers and phones to communicate without leaving a trail. If true, then this is absolutely unreal. Add it to the growing list of dodgy Uber tactics: Ride-hailing company (Uber) hit by revelations it used custom-built tool to deceive law enforc…

When I hear stories like this I think of the developers who likely thought of and implemented the systems behind these criminal acts and I'm once more reminded that software developers, in aggregate, are on a similar level to '90s finance "tricksters" etc. We'll do whatever if the money is there.

One unfortunate side of progress and technological advancement is that it can be unethical, in the hands of people with less ethics.

Think of it this way: 1. Anybody in robotics/ai/ml is helping uav technology used for military purpose. 2. Anybody in financial lending could help fuel financial crisis. 3. Anybody in software could be enabling surveillance technology without even realizing.

Re: When the Judge Distrusts Your Lawyers

#18
post #9
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trade secrets are intellectual property which is ... property. So stealing trade secrets is stealing property which is theft. You can develop what is the equivalent of a trade secret. That is the risk and you have to make efforts to keep the secret a secret. But if an employee copies your trade secret that’s theft.

No, copyright infringement isn't theft even if it has been characterized as "stealing intellectual property". Intellectual property is a broad term without any real meaning. Copyrights don't have to be registered to have effect. Patents do. Trademarks can be either. If you don't defend a trademark, you lose it. If you don't defend against copyright or patent infringement, you can just wait. Patents last for 20 years.…

IANAL but you can't just wait indefinitely if it's viewed as letting evidence deteriorate or setting a kind of trap for the infringer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laches_(equity)

Re: When the Judge Distrusts Your Lawyers

#19
post #4

Could anyone explain why trade secrets are something you can sue over if no NDAs or similar have been signed?

It's technically a type of intellectual property, like a patent. If no agreements are in place, it's still infringement.

Does that mean someone can't independently come up with the formula for Coke (Pepsi or any knock off) because it's their intellectual property? [Or KFC's 13 spices]

Or is Pepsi (and other knock offs) sufficiently different? Or something else working here.

Re: When the Judge Distrusts Your Lawyers

#20
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I hear stories like this I think of the developers who likely thought of and implemented the systems behind these criminal acts and I'm once more reminded that software developers, in aggregate, are on a similar level to '90s finance "tricksters" etc. We'll do whatever if the money is there.

One unfortunate side of progress and technological advancement is that it can be unethical, in the hands of people with less ethics. Think of it this way: 1. Anybody in robotics/ai/ml is helping uav technology used for military purpose. 2. Anybody in financial lending could help fuel financial crisis. 3. Anybody in software could be enabling surveillance technology without even realizing.

It's worse. They realize it, but don't care. Or rather, this is a cool project where we get to transcribe voice in real time.
Post reply on HN