In my earlier posts, I explored the complicated definition of “misappropriation” under the Texas Uniform Trade Secret Act (TUTSA). Litigants and courts often fail to understand all the ways a trade secret may be misappropriated. In this post, I explore the fourth of six alternative paths to liability under TUTSA:
Continue Reading The Six Paths to Liability Under the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act – Part 4
In my July 16 and Sept 25 posts, I explored the complicated definition of “misappropriation” under the Texas Uniform Trade Secret Act (TUTSA). Litigants and courts often fail to understand all the ways a trade secret may be misappropriated. In this post, I explore the third of six alternative paths to liability under TUTSA:
Continue Reading The Six Paths to Liability Under the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act – Part 3
In BCOWW Holdings, LLC v. Collins, SA-17-CA-00379-FB, 2017 WL 3868184 (W.D. Tex. Sept. 5, 2017), the district court denied injunctive relief to the plaintiff who alleged its former employee was using its trade-secret information. Plaintiff alleged that defendant misappropriated, among other things, its confidential drawings (engineering plans) and pricing information. The court observed that these are certainly protected by the Texas Uniform Trade Secret Act (TUTSA)—if the information is kept a secret. Plaintiff argued that it took reasonable efforts to maintain the secrecy of its information by only disclosing it to persons under an implied obligation not to use or disclose it and only on a limited basis.
Continue Reading New Case Explains that Employers Must Be Proactive if They Want to Protect Their Trade Secrets
The Plano-based Center for American and International Law (CAIL) will host its 55th Annual Conference on Intellectual Property Law on November 13 and 14. Joe Cleveland and I will be presenting the 2017 Trade Secrets Update.
Continue Reading Brackett & Ellis Attorneys to Speak at Conference on Intellectual Property Law
In my July 16, 2017 post, I began an exploration of the complicated definition of “misappropriation” under the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“TUTSA”). Litigants and courts often fail to understand all the ways a trade secret may be misappropriated. In this post, I explore the second of six alternative paths to liability under TUTSA:
Continue Reading The Six Paths to Liability Under the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act – Part 2
On September 1, 2017, changes to the Texas Uniform Trade Secret Act (TUTSA) went into effect. These changes were designed to accomplish two goals: (1) incorporate certain provisions of the new federal Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) to eliminate confusion and avoid possible forum shopping between state and federal courts and (2) codify the Texas Supreme Court’s holding in In re M-I, LLC, which sets forth the factors that a court must analyze in order to prohibit a party from participating in certain portions of a trade secrets case.
The September 2017 issue of the Texas Bar Journal published an article outlining these changes to TUTSA.
Continue Reading Texas Bar Journal Publishes Trade Secrets Article by Brackett & Ellis Attorneys
Often, in trade secrets and other types of commercial litigation, the courts will enter protective orders so that the parties can exchange trade secret or proprietary information without losing the “secret” nature of the information. This exchange of information is generally necessary so that the parties can understand the nature of the dispute. For instance, if the claim is that a competitor misappropriated a customer list, the plaintiff might have to produce the customer list that it claims was misappropriated. Additionally, the parties often exchange confidential financial information in order to prove their damages.
Continue Reading When “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” Doesn’t Mean “Attorneys’ Eyes Only”
The Texas Uniform Trade Secret Act’s definition of misappropriation is complicated, and it is frequently misinterpreted by both the courts and litigants. In this post, I explore the first of the six alternative paths to liability:
Continue Reading The Six Paths to Liability Under the Texas Uniform Trade Secret Act – Part 1
Although Texas courts have loosened the restrictions on the enforceability of certain employee agreements over the past two decades, Texas law still requires employee agreements to be supported by adequate consideration—i.e., mutual, non-illusory promises between employee and employer. The recent case of Eurecat US, Inc. v. Marklund, No. 14-15-00418-CV, 2017 WL 2367545 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] May 31, 2017, no pet. h.) illustrates what is not adequate consideration.
Continue Reading Are Your Employee Non-Disclosure Agreements Supported by Adequate Consideration?
Last February, I had the privilege of speaking at the State Bar of Texas’s Intellectual Property Law Workshop. This year’s theme was IP Issues with Technology Startups, and my speech was Protecting your Startup Client’s Intellectual Property and Customer Relationships: The Intersection of Trade Secrets, Confidentiality Agreements, and Covenants Not to Compete. As a springboard for my speech, I discussed the pilot episode of Silicon Valley, which, as others have pointed out, has all sort of intellectual property issues to explore.
Continue Reading Tips for Protecting Your Startup’s Intellectual Property and Customer Relationships: Lessons from HBO’s Silicon Valley