Insights
Publications

Protecting “What Not to Do” as a Negative Trade Secret

October 5, 2022 Articles
Daily Journal

“Negative trade secrets”—i.e., secret know-how about what does not work—are generally protectable in California, but in practice have proven challenging for courts and litigants to discern.  While a trade secret is a company’s intellectual property, an employee’s “general knowledge, skill, and experience acquired in his or her former employment” is not.  The Ret. Grp. v. Galante, 176 Cal. App. 4th 1226, 1237 (2009).  The concept of “negative trade secrets” sits uncomfortably between these two categories.

Consider Thomas Edison’s (possibly apocryphal) quote about his lightbulb experiments: “I haven’t failed, I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.”  Imagine that Thomas Edison’s assistant quit and joined a competitor.  It’s easy to understand the value of knowing those 10,000 failed attempts; that “negative know-how” would allow the competitor to start on attempt 10,001.  But it’s much harder to understand how courts can protect these failed attempts as negative trade secrets.  Can a court really hold Edison’s assistant liable for not re-attempting what he knows won’t work?  Must he re-try all 10,000 prior failures?  Such an outcome would seem to contradict California’s public policy goals favoring innovation and employee mobility. 

Click here to read the full article.

Firm Highlights

Publication

Failures Are Valuable IP: Protect Your Startup’s Negative Trade Secrets

Technology companies and start-ups are familiar with protecting inventions with patents, and protecting their secret formulas, source code, and algorithms as trade secrets. But tech companies may not be aware of another powerful form of...

Read More
News

Tim Horgan-Kobelski Named a Rising Star in IP by Managing IP

Headshot of Tim Horgan-Kobelski
Read More
Publication

How To Avoid Allegations of Trade Secret Misappropriation in California

When departing a company, an executive, founder, or employee with access to trade secrets or confidential information may face legal allegations around whether they will use or disclose their former employer’s trade secrets at...

Read More
Publication

Under FTC’s New Proposed Rule, Employers Will No Longer Be Able to Rely on Noncompete Agreements

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has proposed a rule that would prohibit the use of noncompete agreements in employment contracts. Noncompete agreements prevent employees and independent contractors from pursuing certain forms of employment &ndash...

Read More
News

Farella Braun + Martel Recognized in Benchmark Litigation 2023

Farella Braun + Martel continues to be ranked among the top litigation firms in California in the  Benchmark Litigation  2023 guide. Farella was ranked “Highly Recommended” for Dispute Resolution in California and earned a...

Read More
News

Farella Braun + Martel Announces 2023 New Partner Class

Read More
Publication

Highlights from 2022 Unified Patents Corporate IP Strategy Conference

Recently, several Farella lawyers attended the 2022 Corporate IP Strategy Conference, co-hosted by the Santa Clara University High Tech Law Journal and Unified Patents. Eugene Mar, Erik Olson, Dan Callaway, and Tom Pardini enjoyed...

Read More
News

PNC Scores a Win in Battle With USAA Over Mobile Check Deposit Patents

Eugene Mar, intellectual property litigation partner and chair of the Technology Industry Group, spoke to American Banker for the article "PNC Scores a Win in Battle With USAA Over Mobile Check Deposit Patents." "My...

Read More
News

Farella Braun + Martel Earns 2023 U.S. News – Best Lawyers® "Best Law Firms" Rankings

Read More
Publication

What Recent Rulings in 'hiQ v. LinkedIn' and Other Cases Say About the Legality of Data Scraping

LinkedIn obtained a permanent injunction on Dec. 6 in its six-year-old lawsuit against data scraping company hiQ Labs, which LinkedIn quickly cheered as a “final, decisive victory” that established an “important legal precedent.” While...

Read More