Open Borders, Intellectual Property, & Federal Criminal Trade Secret Law

Shubha Ghosh
{"title":"Open Borders, Intellectual Property, & Federal Criminal Trade Secret Law","authors":"Shubha Ghosh","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1334101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The mobility of skilled labor across firms has been identified as an important source of regional advantage. Scholars have shown how cultural, economic, and legal conditions (such as the nonenforceability of covenants not to compete) affect the development of high tech sectors that are geographically concentrated. This paper explores to what extent these theories are applicable to the movement of skilled labor across national borders. This inquiry is relevant because the United States enacted the Economic Espionage Act in 1996, and this Act has been used to prosecute non-US skilled workers for theft of trade secret. The Act has application to mobility within the United States as well. To what extent are justifications for the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 mitigated by its effects on labor mobility and the accompanying transfer of knowledge and technology? This paper addresses this question through a theoretical discussion of international trade and mobility of labor and knowledge across borders and an assessment of the case law under the Economic Espionage Act. The author criticizes the Act because of its effect on the transfer of knowledge and makes the case for open borders to promote the mobility of knowledge. Several policy implications are drawn for limits on the Economic Espionage Act, including extraterritorial application of state trade secret law and federal patent law.","PeriodicalId":179517,"journal":{"name":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1334101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The mobility of skilled labor across firms has been identified as an important source of regional advantage. Scholars have shown how cultural, economic, and legal conditions (such as the nonenforceability of covenants not to compete) affect the development of high tech sectors that are geographically concentrated. This paper explores to what extent these theories are applicable to the movement of skilled labor across national borders. This inquiry is relevant because the United States enacted the Economic Espionage Act in 1996, and this Act has been used to prosecute non-US skilled workers for theft of trade secret. The Act has application to mobility within the United States as well. To what extent are justifications for the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 mitigated by its effects on labor mobility and the accompanying transfer of knowledge and technology? This paper addresses this question through a theoretical discussion of international trade and mobility of labor and knowledge across borders and an assessment of the case law under the Economic Espionage Act. The author criticizes the Act because of its effect on the transfer of knowledge and makes the case for open borders to promote the mobility of knowledge. Several policy implications are drawn for limits on the Economic Espionage Act, including extraterritorial application of state trade secret law and federal patent law.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
开放边界,知识产权和联邦刑事商业秘密法
技术劳动力在企业之间的流动已被确定为区域优势的重要来源。学者们已经展示了文化、经济和法律条件(如不竞争契约的不可执行性)如何影响地理上集中的高科技部门的发展。本文探讨了这些理论在多大程度上适用于技术劳动力的跨国流动。这项调查具有相关性,因为美国于1996年颁布了《经济间谍法》,该法案已被用于起诉非美国技术工人盗窃商业秘密。该法案也适用于美国境内的流动性。1996年《经济间谍法》对劳动力流动以及随之而来的知识和技术转移的影响,在多大程度上减轻了其正当性?本文通过对国际贸易和跨境劳动力和知识流动的理论讨论以及对《经济间谍法》下的判例法的评估来解决这个问题。作者批评了该法案,因为它对知识转移的影响,并提出了开放边界以促进知识流动的理由。对《经济间谍法》的限制提出了若干政策含义,包括州商业秘密法和联邦专利法的域外适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Policy Responses to Cross-border Central Bank Digital Currencies – Assessing the Transborder Effects of Digital Yuan Artificial Intelligence in the Internet of Health Things: Is the Solution to AI Privacy More AI? Comments on GDPR Enforcement EDPB Decision 01/020 Privacy Rights and Data Security: GDPR and Personal Data Driven Markets Big Boss is Watching You! The Right to Privacy of Employees in the Context of Workplace Surveillance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1