How to confirm that the right holder has taken confidentiality measures in the crime of infringement of trade secrets
In judicial practice, for the right holder to sign a If the confidentiality obligations of others are determined in the form of a confidentiality contract or if confidentiality requirements have been clearly stated, comprehensive considerations should be made and objective determination should be made. For general violations of the confidentiality system, disclosure, use or allowing others to use commercial secrets in one's possession, causing certain economic losses to the right holder, but the perpetrator shows repentance and actively compensates for the losses, and the behavior is not harmful to society. , relief can be provided through civil or other channels, and criminal penalties are generally not suitable; however, for business secrets for which the right holder has taken confidentiality measures in the sense of criminal law, the perpetrator deliberately violates the confidentiality agreement and discloses, uses or allows others to use the business secret. If the commercial secrets in their possession cause heavy losses to the right holder, they shall be held criminally responsible in accordance with the law.
Replay of the case
The defendants Zhou and Tao were originally employees of a mesh material company in Shanghai . The company has independently developed the "puncture type dry mesh" production technology and has taken confidentiality measures to keep it confidential, which is the company's trade secret. The two defendants successively signed a "Labor Contract" with the company, and the "Confidentiality System" is an effective part of the contract. Both men pledged to strictly abide by confidentiality.
Subsequently, Zhou left the company for some reason and jointly established a company with another defendant, Chen, intending to produce "puncture type drying nets" similar to those of the plaintiff company. Face" the same product. Tao left his job without authorization before the contract period with the plaintiff company expired and joined the companies of Chen and Zhou. After that, they customized the same production equipment as the original company, produced the same products as the plaintiff company, and sold them to multiple companies at prices lower than the plaintiff company, making illegal profits of more than 170,000 yuan, and causing losses to the plaintiff company during the same period. The direct economic loss was more than 1 million yuan.
Judge’s comments
The focus of the dispute in this case is mainly whether the right holder has taken any action on the process and technical information involved in the case. Confidentiality measures in the sense of criminal law.
Judicial authorities examine whether the owner of a trade secret has taken confidentiality measuresShi has two main purposes. As an inherent characteristic of trade secrets, a certain degree of reasonable confidentiality measures taken by the right holder to possess technical or business information is an essential requirement for the information to constitute a trade secret, and it is also the factual basis for judicial organs to hear cases of criminal infringement of trade secrets. At the same time, for those who have come into contact with trade secrets, the existence of confidentiality measures is the main basis for judging whether the perpetrator has a legal obligation to keep secrets, and the judicial authorities can use this to judge whether the leaker should bear corresponding legal liability.
The standards for determining confidentiality measures in the sense of criminal law are not completely equivalent to the standards in the sense of civil law. According to the relevant provisions of the civil law, as long as the obligee stipulates a general confidentiality clause in the labor contract, even if there are no other confidentiality measures, the confidentiality obligation of the party is still established. If the agreement is violated, the party will be liable for breach of contract.
Criminal liability, as the most severe legal liability, is a relief method adopted when other legal liabilities are insufficient to relieve the victim, and its punishment targets more general Infringement and other illegal acts are more serious acts that endanger society. Therefore, the infringement of trade secrets treated as a crime should have more serious social harm than ordinary civil torts. Based on this, the identification of confidentiality measures in the sense of criminal law is, in principle, more stringent than in the sense of civil law. In addition to requiring the right holder to make general confidentiality requirements by signing a labor contract in accordance with the above provisions, it is also required to take other confidentiality measures at the same time.
Generally speaking, judicial organs should determine whether the right holder has adopted confidentiality measures in the sense of criminal law from the following aspects: whether the right holder has informed the counterparty of the existence of commercial secrets; Whether the person and the counterparty have signed a contract to keep trade secrets; whether the obligee restricts others from entering places containing trade secrets; whether the obligee has special custody or prohibits the release of documents containing trade secrets.
The plaintiff company not only stipulates the confidentiality obligations of the company's employees on the job and after resignation in the "Labor Contract" signed with its employees, but also establishes relevant confidentiality obligations. The system delimits the scope of the company's trade secrets and conducts specialized management of confidential technical materials. At the same time, the defendants Zhou, Tao and other personnel who knew the process information due to work needs were required to study the plaintiff's company's "Employee Handbook" and "Confidentiality System" when signing the "Labor Contract", and promised to strictly abide by it. Based on this, it can be determined that the confidentiality measures adopted by the plaintiff company regarding the "puncture type dry mesh" technology are confidentiality measures in the sense of criminal law. Therefore, this information meets the characteristics of a trade secret and is a trade secret. The defendant violated the agreement with the plaintiff company and used the trade secret to engage in profit-making activities without authorization, causing significant economic losses to the owner of the trade secret. His behavior was consistent with theCharacteristics of the crime of infringement of trade secrets.
The above knowledge is the editor’s answer to this question. If readers need legal help, they are welcome to go to the Legal Savior Network for legal consultation.
No comments yet. Say something...