美国公司还能实行安全搜查吗?

Leonard M. Fuld
{"title":"美国公司还能实行安全搜查吗?","authors":"Leonard M. Fuld","doi":"10.1002/(SICI)1520-6386(199723)8:3<29::AID-CIR8>3.0.CO;2-L","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Although the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 greatly broadened the definition of “trade secrets” whose misappropriation can trigger criminal penalties, businesses still must keep abreast of the capabilities, vulnerabilities, and intentions of their rivals if they are to remain competitive. Fortunately, the Act does not, in fact, hamstring aggressive intelligence gathering—as long as CI professionals recognize the legal boundaries and apply common sense when in the field. Smart analysis of available data, after all, remains fair game. To navigate gray areas, identify yourself when soliciting information. Be wary of specialized information from suppliers, joint-venture partners, new employees, or job candidates that may legally belong to a competitor. If you know the target company is treating information as confidential, don't ask for it. Observe basic safe-search limits, and you can remain an aggressive competitor. © 1997 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc.</p>","PeriodicalId":100295,"journal":{"name":"Competitive Intelligence Review","volume":"8 3","pages":"29-31"},"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<29::AID-CIR8>3.0.CO;2-L","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can American companies still practice safe searches?\",\"authors\":\"Leonard M. Fuld\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/(SICI)1520-6386(199723)8:3<29::AID-CIR8>3.0.CO;2-L\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Although the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 greatly broadened the definition of “trade secrets” whose misappropriation can trigger criminal penalties, businesses still must keep abreast of the capabilities, vulnerabilities, and intentions of their rivals if they are to remain competitive. Fortunately, the Act does not, in fact, hamstring aggressive intelligence gathering—as long as CI professionals recognize the legal boundaries and apply common sense when in the field. Smart analysis of available data, after all, remains fair game. To navigate gray areas, identify yourself when soliciting information. Be wary of specialized information from suppliers, joint-venture partners, new employees, or job candidates that may legally belong to a competitor. If you know the target company is treating information as confidential, don't ask for it. Observe basic safe-search limits, and you can remain an aggressive competitor. © 1997 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100295,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Competitive Intelligence Review\",\"volume\":\"8 3\",\"pages\":\"29-31\"},\"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<29::AID-CIR8>3.0.CO;2-L\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"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%3C29%3A%3AAID-CIR8%3E3.0.CO%3B2-L\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Competitive Intelligence Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/%28SICI%291520-6386%28199723%298%3A3%3C29%3A%3AAID-CIR8%3E3.0.CO%3B2-L","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

尽管1996年的《经济间谍法》极大地扩大了“商业秘密”的定义,挪用商业秘密可能会引发刑事处罚,但如果企业要保持竞争力,就必须了解竞争对手的能力、弱点和意图。幸运的是,事实上,该法案并没有阻碍积极的情报收集——只要CI专业人员认识到法律界限,并在实地应用常识。毕竟,对现有数据进行明智的分析仍然是公平的。要浏览灰色区域,请在征求信息时表明自己的身份。警惕来自供应商、合资伙伴、新员工或求职者的专业信息,这些信息可能合法属于竞争对手。如果你知道目标公司将信息视为机密,不要索要。遵守基本的安全搜索限制,你可以继续成为一个积极的竞争对手。©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。
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
Can American companies still practice safe searches?

Although the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 greatly broadened the definition of “trade secrets” whose misappropriation can trigger criminal penalties, businesses still must keep abreast of the capabilities, vulnerabilities, and intentions of their rivals if they are to remain competitive. Fortunately, the Act does not, in fact, hamstring aggressive intelligence gathering—as long as CI professionals recognize the legal boundaries and apply common sense when in the field. Smart analysis of available data, after all, remains fair game. To navigate gray areas, identify yourself when soliciting information. Be wary of specialized information from suppliers, joint-venture partners, new employees, or job candidates that may legally belong to a competitor. If you know the target company is treating information as confidential, don't ask for it. Observe basic safe-search limits, and you can remain an aggressive competitor. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
PERANCANGAN SISTEM INFORMASI E-OFFICE BERBASIS WEB DENGAN MENGGUNAKAN METODE RAD PENERAPAN APLIKASI PELAYANAN PUBLIK PADA PENDAFTARAN NPWP SECARA E-REGISTRATION SISTEM PAYLATER DALAM E-COMMERCE: PENGARUHNYA TERHADAP PERILAKU IMPULSE BUYING INTEGRAGSI TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL DAN UNIFIED THEORY OF ACCEPTANCE AND USE OF TECHNOLOGY 2 UNTUK MENGUKUR MINAT PENGGUNA APLIKASI POSPAY DI BANDA ACEH ANALISIS PENGENDALIAN PERSEDIAAN BAHAN BAKU JERAMI UNTUK PRODUKSI JAMUR CHAMPIGNON DENGAN MENGGUNAKAN METODE ECONOMIC ORDER QUANTITY (EOQ)
×
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