Advertisement

April 18, 2014

Amendment to Economic Espionage Act

Don’t say Congress can’t get anything done. At the end of the session, they managed to pass Senate Bill 3642 which changes – slightly – the definition of what trade secrets are covered under the Act.

In the Aleynikov case that we reported about over the years, the defendant managed to walk because the trade secrets he stole were not “produced” for use in interstate commerce.

Under the new law, designed to reverse the earlier decision in Aleynikov, trade secrets used in or intended for use in interstate commerce are now included. The produced for requirement is gone.

Now say goodnight to the 112th Congress.

Copyright © 2014 Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, PLLC. All Rights Reserved.

About the Author

Pressly M Millen, Womble Carlyle Law Firm, Litigation Attorney
Attorney

Press is a trial attorney who has litigated a wide variety of antitrust and other complex business cases, including class actions, in federal and state courts throughout the United States. He has represented clients in numerous industries including pharmaceuticals, software, telecom, and retail. He achieves success for his clients in litigation by being ready, willing and able to take those cases to trial. Press has been named by Business North Carolina as one of its Legal Elite in both Antitrust and Litigation.

Press has represented both defendants and plaintiffs in...

919-755-2135

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

The National Law Review - National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558  Telephone  (708) 357-3317 If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.