How to review evidence in trade secret infringement cases

As the concept of intellectual property rights has become more and more popular, trade secrets, as a special type of intellectual property rights, have become increasingly familiar to the public. At the same time, criminal cases of infringement of trade secrets are also on the rise, and the judicial community is paying close attention to this. So what is the review of evidence in a case of trade secret infringement? The editor of Legal Savior Network has compiled the following relevant information for your reference.

How to review evidence in trade secret infringement cases

In criminal proceedings for infringement of trade secrets, different facts to be proved apply Different proof standards:

1. Trade secret rights The existing facts should be subject to the standard of proof in civil litigation, that is, the "high degree of probability" standard. Because the object of the crime of trade secrets is the trade secret rights of others, and trade secret rights are a kind of private right (civil right), which arises in accordance with private law (civil law) and is determined in accordance with civil litigation procedures. Even in criminal proceedings, the private nature and recognition standards of trade secret rights do not change.

2. Identification of infringement behavior and consequences, Determination shall be based on the general standard of proof in criminal proceedings. For example, the presumption method of “similarity plus contact” in civil litigation cannot be copied. In the case of similarity and contact, although there is a high possibility that the criminal suspect will use improper means to obtain trade secrets, there is still a considerable gap between the maximum probability required for criminal proof.

In the trial of a dispute over infringement of trade secrets, if the facts finally determined are inconsistent with the prior criminal judgment,If the facts determined in the decision are inconsistent, the following different situations should be handled differently:

1. It is normal for different proof standards to be applied in different litigation procedures, resulting in factual differences. For example, regarding the determination of the amount of loss, because the standard of proof in civil litigation is lower than the standard of proof in criminal litigation, the amount of loss recognized in a civil judgment may be higher than the amount recognized in a criminal judgment. For another example, acts that are not recognized as crimes in a criminal judgment because the evidence does not meet the standard of proof in criminal proceedings may still constitute infringement in civil proceedings. In judicial practice, there have been cases where conduct that was not considered a crime of infringement of trade secrets still constituted a civil infringement.

2. The criminal judgment was indeed wrong in ascertaining the facts. One situation is that there is new evidence in the civil lawsuit that overturns the facts identified in the previous criminal judgment; the other situation is that the previous criminal judgment itself is wrong. This situation is not uncommon in judicial practice. Intellectual property trials are highly professional and require judges to have high professional qualifications, and trials of trade secret cases are more complex than ordinary intellectual property cases. According to my country's current hierarchical jurisdiction regulations, intellectual property dispute cases are subject to centralized jurisdiction, with the intermediate court as the first instance. Most intermediate courts and high courts have specialized business tribunals for hearing intellectual property rights in accordance with the requirements of professional division of labor.

The criminal cases of infringement of trade secrets are handled by the grassroots courts It is the first instance, the intermediate court is the second instance, and the corresponding business department is the criminal court. From the perspective of the arrangement of judicial resources, it is inevitable that criminal judgments on trade secrets will deviate. Judging from judicial practice, the quality of handling criminal cases involving trade secret infringement needs to be further improved. In some criminal cases of infringement of trade secrets, from the beginning to the end, from investigation, public prosecution to court judgment, there is no explanation or unclear explanation of the trade secrets involved in the case. If it is discovered in the trial of a case involving a trade secret infringement dispute that a previous criminal judgment was indeed erroneous, the erroneous previous criminal judgment should be corrected through trial supervision procedures and trial-level supervision to avoid conflicts of judgments.

The above is the relevant knowledge compiled by the editor for everyone. If your situation is more complex, the Legal Savior Network also provides online lawyer consultation services. You are welcome to have legal consultation.