{"title":"Criminal consequences of trade secret theft: The EEA and compliance plans","authors":"James Pooley","doi":"10.1002/(SICI)1520-6386(199723)8:3<13::AID-CIR5>3.0.CO;2-C","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>For trade secret owners, the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 (the EEA) provides the prospect of greatly improved protection of property rights. For company employees, the EEA means more attention to defending proprietary information. For competitive intelligence gatherers—including outside consulting firms—the EEA brings new legal restrictions backed up by criminal penalties. Under the government's Federal Sentencing Guidelines, prosecutions for trade secret theft are less likely to be brought if the victim company can show it took steps to prevent and detect criminal conduct. Businesses should therefore adopt and implement compliance plans to protect their proprietary trade secrets. These plans should be designed to take account of the specific risks a company faces. Records should be maintained to demonstrate that the company took all reasonable steps to observe activity that might indicate a misappropriation of trade secrets. Ultimate responsibility for defining and enforcing compliance plans should lie with high-level personnel with authority to influence compliance in a meaningful way. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</p>","PeriodicalId":100295,"journal":{"name":"Competitive Intelligence Review","volume":"8 3","pages":"13-19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6386(199723)8:3<13::AID-CIR5>3.0.CO;2-C","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Competitive Intelligence Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/%28SICI%291520-6386%28199723%298%3A3%3C13%3A%3AAID-CIR5%3E3.0.CO%3B2-C","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
For trade secret owners, the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 (the EEA) provides the prospect of greatly improved protection of property rights. For company employees, the EEA means more attention to defending proprietary information. For competitive intelligence gatherers—including outside consulting firms—the EEA brings new legal restrictions backed up by criminal penalties. Under the government's Federal Sentencing Guidelines, prosecutions for trade secret theft are less likely to be brought if the victim company can show it took steps to prevent and detect criminal conduct. Businesses should therefore adopt and implement compliance plans to protect their proprietary trade secrets. These plans should be designed to take account of the specific risks a company faces. Records should be maintained to demonstrate that the company took all reasonable steps to observe activity that might indicate a misappropriation of trade secrets. Ultimate responsibility for defining and enforcing compliance plans should lie with high-level personnel with authority to influence compliance in a meaningful way. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
商业秘密盗窃的刑事后果:欧洲经济区和合规计划
对于商业秘密所有者来说,1996年的《经济间谍法》(EEA)提供了大大改善产权保护的前景。对于公司员工来说,欧洲经济区意味着更加重视保护专有信息。对于竞争情报收集者——包括外部咨询公司——欧洲经济区带来了新的法律限制,并辅以刑事处罚。根据政府的《联邦量刑指南》,如果受害公司能够证明其已采取措施预防和侦查犯罪行为,就不太可能对商业秘密盗窃提起诉讼。因此,企业应制定并实施合规计划,以保护其专有商业秘密。这些计划应考虑到公司面临的具体风险。应保存记录,以证明公司采取了一切合理措施来观察可能表明盗用商业机密的活动。定义和执行合规计划的最终责任应由有权以有意义的方式影响合规性的高级人员承担。©1997 John Wiley&;股份有限公司。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。