Re: Informix vs Oracle, alleged trade secret theft

netac wrote:
>

 [SNIP]
> I haven't missed the point. I agree with you, but what I am saying is
> that companies now try to extend the "trade secret" concept to include
> "your knowledge" and therefore your marketable skills. Obviosuly many
> of us in development use our knowledge to develop things for our
> companies that become their "trade secrets", so where is the line
> between our knowledge, that belongs to us, and their trade secret, whihc
> belongs to the company. What I am saying is that this line is blurring
> in favor of the companies. If it continues, we will all be indentured
> servants, having to work for our current company at any level of
> compensation because they can use the courts to prevent us from going
> someplace else with our marketeable skills...

It has always been in favor of the companies. Lets look at an example:

Supose I am a quant jock working for company Trader-X. I develop an option pricing program which is 15 basis points more accurate than those currently being used by my competitors. (15 basis points is 15/100 of a percent.) Trader-X then uses this program to compare the prices of options with the prices we calculated. Trader-X makes millions!

Trader-Vic a competitor wants to know how Trader-X does it. In the end, Trader-Vic finds out I am the guy, so they want to hire me. I have a non-compete clause with Trader-X. Can I go to work for Trader-Vic? After all, they promised me Jenny McCarthy along with the penthouse on Mag Mile ;-)

The answer is maybe. State laws control contracts. Illinois is a right to work state. This means that a former employer can not stop me from working in my profession. It all depends on how the contract was written. If the clause is too repressive, the courts *may* say the clause is too restrictive and violates my right to work. But if the contract blocks me from working for a direct competitor for a period of time, then the courts will allow it as a valid clause.

However in my scenario, I can't since Trader-Vic is a direct compettitor and Trader-X has paid me to create a program which gives them a compettive edge. They own the intellectual property or trade secret.

You have to remember that they paid you to learn and do the research to develop the product, hence they have a right to that product. After all, your knowledge was gained through collaberation. The laws are there to help protect a company's investment and recoupe their expenses.

Just my $.02 worth.

-Mikey
BTW, I'm not a lawyer. I just play one on TV ;-) Received on Fri Jan 31 1997 - 00:00:00 CET