Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
When an employee conceives of a new innovation, a business is often confronted with a difficult decision — whether to apply for patent protection on the innovation or whether to keep the innovation confidential as a company trade secret. There are many considerations that a business must take into account stemming from different characteristics of trade secrets and patents.
A patent is a right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing a patented invention. It is generally enforceable up to 20 years after the patent application filing date. Filing for patent protection entails a significant quid pro quo — in exchange for exclusivity over the term of the patent, the patent applicant must make a disclosure of the invention sufficient for a person reading the patent to make and use the invention. Once the 20 years are up, the invention is then dedicated to the public and may be used by anyone.
A trade secret, in contrast, is kept confidential within the business. There is no right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, selling, or importing the technology, unless that technology has been misappropriated from the business — i.e., the technology has been obtained from the business through an improper means like theft or espionage, or there has been a disclosure without consent, such as through a violation of a nondisclosure agreement. As a result, a trade secret provides no protection against a competitor's independent invention of the technology or a competitor's reverse engineering of a product embodying the trade secret. On the other hand, a trade secret, unlike a patent, has no expiration date and theoretically can last forever — as long as the trade secret stays confidential within the company.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.