Strategies to Maintain and Enforce Your Trade Secrets
Presenters: David Enzminger,
Sheryl Falk John Keville
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Today’s eLunch Presenters
David Enzminger Silicon Valley Managing Partner
SV: (650) 858-6580
LA: (213) 615-1780
John Keville Houston Office Managing Partner
(713) 651-2659
Sheryl Falk Partner Houston
(713) 651-2615
2
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Presentation Agenda
Trade Secret Basics and Risk
Internal Forensic Investigation
Strategies to Enforce Your Trade Secrets
Playing Defense – Responding to a Claim
(Feel free to send in questions)
3
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Trade Secret Basics and Risk, What Protections are Available?
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Generally provides a uniform Law for protection of trade secrets
UTSA is not identical in all states
Which state law governs can be important Choice of law provisions in
nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) and covenants not to compete
5
Uniform Trade Secret Act (UTSA) Varies By State
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
1: Proving the Information is a Trade Secret
“Trade secrets” protect information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique or process, that:
1) Derives independent economic value, actual or potential,
from not being generally known to the public or to other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; and
2) Is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.
Uniform Trade Secrets Act
6
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Trade Secrets
Not Trade Secrets Financial Information (costs,
pricing, profits, margins, etc.) Marketing information Research and development Negative information (what does
not work) Unique approach to a
problem/process
Independent discovery Reverse engineering Inadvertent disclosure from
failure to use reasonable protective measures
7
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Reasonable Efforts to Maintain Secrecy
Law Must be reasonable “under the circumstances” Failure to do anything precludes protection Examples: Restricting data – need to know, NDAs,
confidentiality agreements, confidential markings
Practical Realities The worse defendant’s conduct, the less the
requirement Closer the relationship, the less the requirement Efforts do not always match the risk
8
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Companies Should be Able to Demonstrate Reasonable Efforts to Maintain Secrecy 1) Evaluate information security controls
2) Adopt policies and procedures that focus on maintaining
confidentiality
3) Consider non-competition agreements, non-disclosure agreements and confidentiality agreements
4) Monitor employee activity
5) Act quickly to investigate/enforce trade secrets
9
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Not any value – but economic value “due to its secrecy”
UTSA requirements greater than traditionally required at common law
Requirement of Economic Value
10
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
UTSA Definition §1(2)
Misappropriation means: (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.
Includes Actual or Threatened Misappropriation
1. Wrongful Acquisition, 2. Wrongful Disclosure, or 3. Wrongful Use
2. Proving Misappropriation
11
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Inevitable Disclosure Majority Rule: A limited duration injunction in many jurisdictions where an
employee with significant trade secret knowledge departs for a competitor to perform the same or substantially similar job PepsiCo v. Redmond, 54 F.3d 1262 (7th Cir. 1995)
Minority (California): Inevitable disclosure doctrine expressly rejected in California,
which instead requires more evidence of actual or threatened misappropriation than a reliance on the knowledge of the employee and the scope of the employees next job Whyte v. Schlage Lock, Co. 101 Cal. App. 4th 1443 (2002)
12
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
UTSA § 3. Damages (a) Except to the extent that a material and prejudicial
change of position prior to acquiring knowledge or reason to know of misappropriation renders a monetary recovery inequitable, a complainant is entitled to recover damages for misappropriation. Damages can include both the actual loss caused by misappropriation and the unjust enrichment caused by misappropriation that is not taken into account in computing actual loss. In lieu of damages measured by any other methods, the damages caused by misappropriation may be measured by imposition of liability for a reasonable royalty for a misappropriator’s unauthorized disclosure or use of a trade secret.
(b) If willful and malicious misappropriation exists, the court may award exemplary damages in the amount not exceeding twice any award made under subsection (a).
Monetary Damages
1. Damages 2. Disgorgement of unjust
gains 3. In some cases, a reasonable
royalty 4. Potential punitive damages
Remedies: Damages Under The UTSA
13
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Kicking Off the Trade Secrets Internal Investigation
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Investigation Triggers
16
DLP software alert
Suspicious departures
Exposure to highly sensitive information
Refusal to account for all company assets
New company with former employees announces competing product in suspiciously short time
Improper customer contacts
Frequent use of external USB devices
Forwarding documents to external email address
Copying documents to unapproved cloud storage services
Use of external VPN services to hide activities
New company with former employees announces competing product in suspiciously short time
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Identifying & Preserving Evidence
Identify all relevant evidence sources Obtain forensic copy of relevant evidence Suspend process driven deletions for custodians Chain of custody to document collection
17
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Looking for proof of Access/Copying/Transfer of Confidential Manner and extent of a user’s access/copying of
proprietary data USB connections Email of confidential data Photographs of confidential data On-Line storage uploads Peer sharing applications Log files/system files Printer artifacts
18
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
User Created File Types Word documents
PDFs
Text documents
Zip files
Excel spreadsheets
Power points
Database entries
Calendar entries
Contacts
Substantive – Application data that reflects substantive changes by a user
System – Information created by the user’s information management system
Embedded – Consists of text, numbers, content, data or other information input into the file, which h is not typically visible to the user
Aguilar v. Immigration & Customs Enforcement, 255 F.R.D. 350 (S.D.N.Y 2008)
19
Meta Data can show User interaction with data
PX400
PX081
20
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP 21
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP 22
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Registry/System Files Show Information About Computer Use 1) Identifies installed or uninstalled programs, including eradication programs
2) Shows device connections such as USB, Phone, Camera Card, Printer, etc.
23
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Text & Communications Place Actions into Context 1) Text “Make sure to use CCleaner before you turn in
your computer”
2) Chats
3) Skype “I’ll see how good it is and how much they’re
willing to compensate me to prevent irreparable harm to the company”
24
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
The Game Changer
The Court Ordered Production of:
1) Preservation of all relevant data
2) Employees’ home computers
3) Personal storage devices
25
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
10 Indications of Missing Data/Data Destruction
1) Data eradication programs 2) Missing data 3) Empty recycle bin 4) Reformatted drive 5) Completely wiped drive 6) Missing internet cache 7) No temporary files 8) Registry data missing 9) Patterns in unallocated space 10) Failure to preserve/continued use
26
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Strategies to Enforce Your Trade Secrets
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Pre-Game: Make the Demand
Send demand letter to the employee Require cooperation
Require consent to forensic inspection of data
Interview regarding use and disclosure of data
Affidavit/settlement agreement
28
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
So, You Have Evidence of Misappropriation
1) Act quickly to investigate suspicious activity or resignations
2) Build the case before filing
3) Don’t count on discovery without a hook California – No discovery until the alleged trade
secret has been disclosed with reasonable particularity (Cal.Civ.P.Code 2019)
4) Issue preservation notices right away
5) Pursue aggressive discovery based upon pre-filing foundation
29
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Filing Suit – Strategic Considerations 1) Where to file? 2) Whether to sue employer? 3) How much to share about what you know? 4) What claims should you bring? 5) Do you evidence of spoliation? 6) Do you inform law enforcement? 7) Do you move for a TRO?
30
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
UTSA § 2. Injunctive Relief
(a) Actual or threatened misappropriation may be enjoined. Upon application to the court an injunction shall be terminated when the trade secret has ceased to exist, but the injunction may be continued for an additional reasonable period of time in order to eliminate commercial advantage that otherwise would be derived from the misappropriation
(b) In exceptional circumstances, an injunction may
condition future use upon payment of a reasonable royalty for no longer than the period of time for which use could have been prohibited. Exceptional circumstances include, but are not limited to, a material and prejudicial change of position prior to acquiring knowledge or reason to know of misappropriation that renders a prohibitive injunction inequitable
(c) In appropriate circumstances, affirmative acts to protect
a trade secret may be compelled by court order
Generally:
Injunctive Relief to Prevent Future Misappropriation and to Remove “Lead Time Advantage”
31
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Playing Defense – Responding to a Trade Secret Claim
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
To Pre-Empt Trade Secret Claims – Employees
1) Require confidentiality agreement as a condition of employment Include specific provision that strictly prohibits the use of other’s confidential
information
State the company’s policy against the use of any such information
Include provision that employer is aware of prior employer’s confidentiality agreement and requires strict compliance
2) Communicate the importance of confidentiality agreements Document meetings, internal communications and policy manuals to show
good faith intention not to misappropriate confidential information
33
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
To Pre-Empt Trade Secret Claims – Business Partners
1) Use a carefully drafted NDA
2) Include defensive provisions designed to protect against and minimize the possibility of a subsequent claim
3) Narrow definition of what is “confidential”
4) Require labeling of confidential information
5) Include time frame of confidentiality obligations
6) Disclaim any implied obligations that exceed the agreement’s confidentiality obligations
34
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
When Faced with a Trade Secret Claim
1) Negotiate and narrow the scope of relevant information
2) Force the plaintiff to define the alleged misappropriated secret with particularity
3) Work to show this information is publically available to set up for a summary judgment
4) Seek the dismissal of all other claims as pre-empted
5) Show the plaintiff’s claim is inconsistent with employee mobility
35
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Sometimes, the Best Defense is a Good Offense
Be proactive in your investigation
Retain top notch experts Think outside the play book Make big plays
36
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Questions?
© 2016 Winston & Strawn LLP
Thank You.
David Enzminger Silicon Valley Managing Partner
SV: (650) 858-6580
LA: (213) 615-1780
John Keville Houston Office Managing Partner
(713) 651-2659
Sheryl Falk Partner Houston
(713) 651-2615
39