New Federal Law Intends To Help Firms Protect Trade Secrets

By Dustin Walsh

U.S. companies are set to find an ally in protecting valuable trade secrets from the federal court system.
Both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives stamped their approval last month on the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2015 — a bill that provides civil action in federal courts and stiff penalties for theft of protected information from corporations. President Barack Obama signed the bill last week. This act will be reviewed by an Atlanta trade secrets lawyer in full.
Tom Brady, partner and head of the labor and employment practice at Detroit-based law firm Clark Hill PLC, said the impending law creates uniformity — 48 states currently have versions of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act — for protecting trade secrets across the nation.
"Most states have a version of the trade secrets act, but it's a balkanized treatment to protection," Brady said. "(Trade secret theft) is increasingly a problem as technology expands and outside third parties increase hacking to get those secrets or employees that can now simply put in a thumb drive to download those secrets."
Trade secrets differ, and are often less protected, than copyrights and patents.
Trade secrets are considered private materials such as manufacturing processes that don't meet the patent guidelines, software, financial information, pricing information, etc.
The Defend Trade Secrets Act differs slightly from the Uniform Trade Secrets Act in that it allows a plaintiff fearing its trade secrets have been stolen to file a federal court order to allow the government to seize the stolen information before the alleged defendant is notified of a lawsuit — an ex parte seizure.
"I don't have evidence to support that this happens a lot, but I'd imagine whoever took the trade secret is likely to hide or destroy the (stolen) information to eliminate the proof," Brady said. "Before (the law), the information couldn't be seized until the lawsuit was over."
The penalties are also much stiffer under the Defend Trade Secrets Act. Plaintiffs can now seek up to two times the damages plus attorney fees, making a high-profile case very costly to the defendant, Brady said.
While the law will strengthen enforcement, companies still must ensure they are protecting valuable information to be considered a trade secret, Brady said.
"Companies need to start training employees on how to properly protect trade secrets in the first place," Brady said.
"Smart companies are going to put notices in their policy manuals and work to keep their secrets secret."

Potential New International Services Agreement – USTR Seeking Comments on Negotiations

Story First appeared on Washington Trade News at Stewart and Stewart.com
   
On January 15, 2013, USTR Ron Kirk notified Congress of the Administration’s intent to enter into negotiations for a new trade agreement on international trade in services, and, on January 24, 2013, USTR issued a Federal Register notice requesting public comments on the new services negotiations.  Comments must submitted by February 26, 2013. Stewart and Stewart is following these negotiations carefully regarding their possible impact upon International Trade Free Trade Agreements.

In a new Trade Flow, Terence P. Stewart, managing partner of Stewart and Stewart, explains that the United States currently benefits from trade in services ($178.5 billion surplus in 2011) and, if barriers are reduced (it is estimated that lost services exports are equal to $800 billion), the U.S. has the potential of benefiting even more in increased exports and jobs.    For Stewart and Stewart, this potential is key, and their Customs attorneys are closely monitoring the developments.  However, the WTO's (World Trade Organization) General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), in effect since 1995, has yet to fulfill one of the fundamental objectives of the GATS—progressive liberalization—due to delays occasioned by the uncompleted Doha round and other reasons.  Thus, countries interested in expanding services access have increasingly focused on the possibility of bilateral or plurilateral negotiations as an alternative to the stalled Doha talks.  The new services negotiations announced by USTR are a result of that process.  The negotiations will initially involve the United States and twenty of its trading partners (mostly developed countries), with the possibility that other countries may join the discussions later.  Import and Export trading is key to the balance of the world economy, therefore the professional attorneys at Stewart and Stewart are closely monitoring these negotiations.

The new services negotiations are likely to be broad in scope and coverage, and all U.S. stakeholders should consider submitting comments so that USTR may be fully informed of the potential benefits and challenges that liberalized trade in services presents to U.S. service providers.