The Trade Secret Paradox
Trade secret law contains a puzzle at its core that distinguishes it from every other area of intellectual property. Walk through a scenario to discover it.
The Scenario
Jordan, your lead engineer, resigned on Friday. On Monday, she starts at your direct competitor. During her three years at your company, Jordan had access to the proprietary algorithm that powers your core product. You believe she took it with her.
You call your lawyer. "Can we sue?"
Your lawyer asks three questions.
Element 1: Information
UTSA § 1(4); Defend Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1839(3)
Element 2: Independent Economic Value from Secrecy
UTSA § 1(4)(i); DTSA § 1839(3)(B)
Element 3: Reasonable Efforts to Maintain Secrecy
UTSA § 1(4)(ii); DTSA § 1839(3)(A)
The Paradox
You cannot prove misappropriation unless the information was a trade secret.
But you cannot prove something was a trade secret unless you can show that you tried to prevent misappropriation.
The law protects secrets. But whether something is a secret is judged only after someone has allegedly stolen it.
This circularity distinguishes trade secrets from every other form of intellectual property. Patents are granted by the government. Copyrights arise automatically. Trademarks protect symbols used in commerce. But trade secrets are defined by the very secrecy that their misappropriation destroys.