Comparison of the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) and the EU Trade Secrets Directive
Comparison of the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) and the EU Trade Secrets Directive
Written By:
J. Dana Hubbard, Former Head of Patents, Life Sciences, MilliporeSigma
Susan G. L. Glovsky, Principal, Hamilton Brook Smith Reynolds
Christine M. Wise, Associate, Hamilton Brook Smith Reynolds
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
Effective date July 5, 2016. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by June 9, 2018. |
|
(See 18 USC §1839) |
(See Article 2) |
Misappropriation a/k/a Unlawful Acquisition
|
“Improper” means: (A) includes theft, bribery, misrepresentation, breach or inducement of a breach of a duty to maintain secrecy, or espionage through electronic or other means; and (B) does not include reverse engineering, independent derivation, or any other lawful means of acquisition. (See 18 USC §1839) |
The use or disclosure of a trade secret shall be considered unlawful whenever carried out, without the consent of the trade secret holder, by a person who is found to meet any of the following conditions: (a) having acquired the trade secret unlawfully; (b) being in breach of a confidentiality agreement or any other duty not to disclose the trade secret; (c) being in breach of a contractual or any other duty to limit the use of the trade secret. The acquisition, use or disclosure of a trade secret shall also be considered unlawful whenever a person, at the time of the acquisition, use or disclosure, knew or ought, under the circumstances, to have known that the trade secret had been obtained directly or indirectly from another person who was using or disclosing the trade secret unlawfully. The production, offering or placing on the market of infringing goods, or the importation, export or storage of infringing goods for those purposes, shall also be considered an unlawful use of a trade secret where the person carrying out such activities knew, or ought, under the circumstances, to have known that the trade secret was used unlawfully. (See Article 4) |
|
(See 18 U.S.C. §1839) |
(See Article 8) |
|
The term “owner,” with respect to a trade secret, means the person or entity in whom or in which rightful legal or equitable title to, or license in, the trade secret is reposed; (See 18 U.S.C. §1836 and 18 U.S.C. §1839)
|
“Trade secret holder” means any natural or legal person lawfully controlling a trade secret. (See Article 2 and Article 3) |
|
The DTSA, contrary to the EU Directive, does not provide for the lawful acquisition, use or disclosure of a trade secret when such acquisition, use or disclosure is required or allowed by Union or national law. (See 18 USC §1839) |
The acquisition, use or disclosure of a trade secret shall be considered lawful to the extent that such acquisition, use or disclosure is required or allowed (See Article 3) |
|
(See 18 U.S.C. §1835) |
The measures at least include the possibility: (1) of restricting access to any document containing trade secrets or alleged trade secrets submitted by the parties or third parties, in whole or in part, to a limited number of persons; (2) of restricting access to hearings, when trade secrets or alleged trade secrets may be disclosed, and the corresponding record or transcript of those hearings to a limited number of persons; and (3) of making available a non-confidential version of any
|
|
In a civil action brought under this subsection with respect to the misappropriation of a trade secret, a court[1] may – (1) Grant an injunction--(i) to prevent any actual or threatened misappropriation described in paragraph (1) on such terms as the court deems reasonable. (2) Affirmative actions to be taken to protect the trade secret. (3) In exceptional circumstances that render an injunction inequitable, that conditions future use of the trade secret upon payment of a reasonable royalty for no longer than the period of time for which such use could have been prohibited. Award (1) Damages for actual loss caused by the misappropriation of the trade secret; and (2) Damages for any unjust enrichment caused by the (3) In lieu of damages measured by any other methods, the damages caused by the misappropriation measured by imposition of liability for a reasonable royalty for the misappropriator's unauthorized disclosure or use of the trade secret. (4) If the trade secret is willfully and maliciously misappropriated, award exemplary damages in an amount not more than 2 times the amount of the damages awarded. (5) If a claim of the misappropriation is made in bad faith, which may be established by circumstantial evidence, a motion to terminate an injunction is made or opposed in bad faith, or the trade secret was willfully and maliciously misappropriated, award reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party. (6) Based on an affidavit or verified complaint satisfying the requirements of this paragraph, the court may, upon ex parte application but only in extraordinary circumstances, issue an order providing for the seizure of property necessary to prevent the propagation or dissemination of the trade secret that is the subject of the action. (See 18 U.S.C. §1836) |
Member States shall ensure that, where a judicial decision taken on the merits of the case finds that there has been unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of a trade secret, the competent judicial authorities may, at the request of the applicant, order one or more of the following measures against the infringer: (1) The cessation of or, as the case may be, the prohibition of the use or disclosure of the trade secret. (2) The prohibition of the production, offering, placing on the market or use of infringing goods, or the importation, export or storage of infringing goods for those purposes. (3) The adoption of the appropriate corrective measures with regard to the infringing goods, which includes: (a) recall of the infringing goods from the market; (b) depriving the infringing goods of their infringing quality; (c) destruction of the infringing goods or, where appropriate, their withdrawal from the market, provided that the withdrawal does not undermine the protection of the trade secret in question. (4) The destruction of all or part of any document, object, material, substance or electronic file containing or embodying the trade secret or, where appropriate, the delivery up to the applicant of all or part of those documents, objects, materials, substances or electronic files. (5) The seizure or delivery up of the suspected infringing goods, including imported goods, so as to prevent their entry into, or circulation on, the market. “Infringing goods” means goods, the design, characteristics, functioning, production process or marketing of which significantly benefits from trade secrets unlawfully acquired, used or disclosed. Award (1) Member States shall ensure that the competent judicial authorities, upon the request of the injured party, order an (2) Member States may limit the liability for damages of employees towards their employers for the unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of a trade secret of the employer where they act without intent. (3) The competent judicial authorities shall take into account all appropriate factors, such as the negative economic consequences, including lost profits, which the injured party has suffered, any unfair profits made by the infringer and, in appropriate cases, elements other than economic factors, such as the moral prejudice caused to the trade secret holder by the unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of the trade secret. (4) The competent judicial authorities may, in appropriate cases, set the damages as a lump sum on the basis of elements such as, at a minimum, the amount of royalties or fees which would have been due had the infringer requested authorisation to use the trade secret in question. (See Articles 2, 10, 12 and 14) |
|
|
|
|
There is no specified exception for journalists. Notice Requirement for contracts and agreements that are entered into or updated after the date of enactment of this subsection (May 11, 2016). [2]
Employee includes any individual performing work as a contractor or consultant for the employer. (See 18 U.S.C. §1833) |
Immunity for exercising the right to freedom of expression and information as set out in the Charter, including respect for the freedom and pluralism of the media. No Notice Requirement. (Recital 20 and Article 5)
|
|
(See 18 U.S.C. §1836) |
(See Article 1) |
[1] District Courts have original jurisdiction of civil actions brought under the DTSA. 18 USC section 1836 (c).
[2] An employer shall provide notice of the immunity to employees in any contract or agreement with an employee that governs the use of trade secret or other confidential information. The DTSA does not state how detailed the notice must be or what precisely it must say. The DTSA states that employers will be considered in compliance with the notice requirement if they provide “a cross-reference to a policy document provided to the employee that sets forth the employer’s reporting policy for a suspected violation of law.”