美國、歐盟及我國營業秘密侵害之比較研究—以民事救濟為中心 - 政大學術集成

全文

(1)Graduate Institute of Law and Inter-Discipline College of Law. National Chengchi University Master Thesis. 立. 政治大. —. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. Comparative research on the regime of the United States, European Union and Taiwan —— Focusing on Remedies in Trade Secret Civil Litigation. er. io. sit. y. Nat. n. a l Chun-Yi Lin iv n Ch engchi U. Advisor: Chung-Lun Shen, Ph.D.. 107 7 July 2018. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(2) 》. 政》治大》. 。. 》. 學. 》. ‧. ‧ 國. 立. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. i. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(3) 〉《 2016 」. 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. 」. n. a l」 Ch. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 》〈. 」. 」. engchi U. 《. v ni. 。。. 」. ii. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(4) Abstract Trade secrets play an important role in the boosting knowledge-based economy. Due to the nature of trade secrets, an infringement of trade secrets can result in the immediate loss of advantage, making the protection and remedies of trade secrets even more important. Furthermore, it is common for companies to do trans-national business activities, and competition among international companies is inevitable. The countries have been increasing the protection of trade secrets day by day. In order to protect the trade secrets of our people, Taiwan needs to keep up with the international trends of trade secrets protection. The United States and the European Union have subsequently introduced the acts on trade secrets in 2016, which showed the importance of trade secrets in the globe. This essay will focus on the civil remedies of trade secrets infringement in the aforementioned two acts. Specifically, this essay will look into the United State’s. 政治大. Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (the “DTSA”) and the European Union's Directive (EU). 立. 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on the protection. ‧ 國. 學. of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure (the “Directive”) and observe the differences among them and Taiwan.. ‧. This essay first introduces the Directive. The Directive serves as the unified and. y. Nat. minimum standard for the legislation of Member States on the protection of trade secrets.. sit. It reiterates the importance of trade secrets to the European Union. The Directive refers. al. er. io. to the U.S. Uniform Trade Secrets Act (the “UTSA”), so the content of the Directive is. n. similar to that of the U.S. trade secret laws and regulations. However, some of the. Ch. i n U. v. provisions in the Directive are originated from the existing legislation of the Member. engchi. States. As there are more and more cross-national companies nowadays, the protection of trade secrets being harmonized across the countries can benefit the overall trade secrets protection and R&D innovation. The rest of the world, including Taiwan, can also refer to the Directive for re-examination of its legislation regarding trade secrets. The DTSA was introduced due to the inconsistency of trade secrets protection among the states caused by the UTSA. The DTSA was aimed at providing a more comprehensive trade secrets legislation at the level of federal scheme, making relevant laws more predictable to those with legitimate interests in trade secrets. In order to ensure the trade secrets protection of U.S. companies engaging cross-national business activities, DTSA provides extraterritoriality reach for misappropriation of U.S. companies’ trade secrets. The legal regime of the United States has played an important role in Taiwan’s legal regime. Several concepts in the DTSA, including but not limited to the inevitable iii. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(5) disclosure doctrine, ex parte seizure, and immunity to whistleblowers liabilities, can help to improve the legislation of trade secrets in Taiwan. Similar to the purpose of the Directive, the legislators created the DTSA to unify the difference of trade secrets legislation among the states. We can further observe the differences and similarities between the Directive and the DTSA. Lastly, by observing and analyzing Taiwan’s protection of trade secrets, with focus on civil remedies, this essay will review the predicament of Taiwan’s current legislation in terms of trade secrets protection, and attempt to provide suggestions on the amendment to trade secret law in Taiwan through the observation on the DTSA and the Directive. Keywords: trade secret infringement, civil remedies, Directive (EU) 2016/943, and Defend Trade Secrets Act.. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. iv. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(6) ................................................................ !. .................................................................................... !. .......................................................................................................................................... i ......................................................................................................................................... ii ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................... iii ........................................................................................................................ 1 ............................................................................................................ 1 ............................................................................................................ 3. 政治大 ................................................................................................ 3 立 ................................................................................................. 4 ............................................................................................. 3. ‧ 國. 學. ........................................................................................................ 4 ........................................................................................................ 4. ‧. .................................................................................. 5. y. Nat. ................................................................................. 5. sit. ........................................................................................................ 5. n. al. er. io. ........................................................................................................ 7. iv n C ....................................................................................... 11 hengchi U. ................................................................................................. 8. .................................................................................................. 11 ........................................................................................... 12 .............................................................................................. 13 ........................................................................................... 13 ............................................................................................... 14 .......................................................................................................... 15 .......................................................................................................... 15 ................................................. 17. ......................................................... 17 ........................................................ 17 ........................................................ 34 v. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(7) ............................................................................... 35 ........................................................................................... 35 ...................................................................................................... 37 ........................................................................ 38 ........................................................................................... 38 ........................................................................... 43 .................................................................................................................. 50 ...................................... 53 ....... 53 .................................................... 54 ....................................................................................... 67. 《. ..................................... 71 治政 .................................................................... 73 大. 」. 立........................................................................................... 74 ‧ 國. 學. ...................................................................................................... 75 ............................................................ 77. ‧. ....................................................................... 77 ........................................................................... 80. ................................................... 103 .............................................................. 103. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. .................................................................................................................. 96. Ch. i Un. v. ......................................................................................... 103. e......................................................................... ngchi 107. ............................................................................. 123 ............................... 123 ..................................................................... 124 ...................................................... 124. 〈. .................................................................. 125 ..................................................................................... 125 ................................................................................................................ 126 .................................................................................................................... 131 ............................................................................................................................. 133 ..................................................................................................................... 145 vi. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(8) 1. 政治大. 立. 2. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. 1996. Ch. 3. engchi. i Un. v. 2013. 2. 1. 2015. 1. 2 2017. 2. 10. 2 16 1996 1 2013. 3. 11 http://www.tipo.gov.. tw/public/Attachment/3129153335100.pdf 1. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(9) SK 4. 5. 6. 2015. 2017. 10. 2003. 1. 123. 2. 7. 5. 11. 立. 」. 2016. 7. 5. 學. ‧ 國. 」. Uniform Trade Secret Act. 〈. ‧. 」. io. sit. y. Nat. 8. 2016. n. al. er. 5. 政治2016 大 Defend Trade Secrets Act. Ch. engchi. i Un. v。. 。。. 。. 4. http://judiciary.asahi.com/fukabori/2016020200001.html 2018/07/09 5 Japan Strengthens Deterrence Measures Against Trade Secret Infringement, http://www.jonesday. com/japan-strengthens-deterrence-measures-against-trade-secret-infringement-02-10-2016/ 2018/07/09 6 — 178 37 2013 10 7 2017 10 1 http://iknow.s tpi.narl.org.tw/Post/Read.aspx?PostID=13750 2018/07/09 8 2016 」 DTSA 209 87-88 2016 10 2. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(10) 。〈」. 9. 《. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat 2016. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 2016. 9. 2016. 28. 。. 10. 5. 10 3. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(11) 立. 政治大. y. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. Nat. n. er. io. al. sit. 」. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 4. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(12) actio servi corrupti 10. 1817. Newbery v. James. 治v. Norfolk 政Peabody 大. 12. 1868. 13. 20 14. 20. 1979. 1995 15. 53. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 1994. 1939. ‧. 1996. 學. ‧ 國. 立. 11. al. Paris Convention. n. iv n C Agreement on Trade RelatedhAspect of Intellectual e n g c h i U Property Rights, Including. for the Protection of Industrial Property Trade in Counterfeit Goods. TRIPS. 16. TRIPS 10. 1883. 2. 10. ─. 3 1993. 1. 1 11 12 13. Newbery v. James, 35 Eng. Rep. 1011, 1013 (Ct. 1817) Peabody v. Norfolk, 98 Mass. 452 (1868) 1 4. 14. 2009. 22. 2. 117. 3. 15 16. 114. 2009. 1. 5. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(13) 17 18. TRIPS Organization Trade. WTO. World Trade General Agreement on Tariffs and. GATT. GATT. TRIPS 19. 1.. TRIPS. WTO. 39. 2. 1967 2.. (a). 立. (c). 政治大. (b) 3.. TRIPS. er. io. sit. y. Nat. WTO. al. iv n U 1995. n. 21. 1995 C h 1996. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. 20. 1. engchi. 12. 23. 2013 2. 2014. 1. 5 22. 17. 18. 19 16. 239 17. 2012. 19. 3 2011 1 2 https://www.tipo.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=207100&ctNode=6780&m. 20. p=1. 11. 2018/07/09. 21. 345. 2016. 9. 11. 22. 6. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(14) 1. 23 24. 政治大. 25. 立. 26. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat 28. 27. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 29. 23. 10. 3. 10 1. 3 6. 24. 21. 25 26 27. 348. http://www.copyrightnote.org/ArticleContent.aspx?ID=8&ai. d=2465. 2018/07/09. 28. 21. 29. 349 1. 1. 1. 199-202 1988. 7 7. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(15) 30 31. 政治大. 立. 2. ‧ 國. 學「. Nat. 2. io. sit. y. 39. n. al. er. 32. ‧. TRIPS. TRIPS. (b). Ch. i Un. (a). v. 、. e n g c h i(c) 33. TRIPS TRIPS. 2. (1). (a) (b). (c) 34. 30. 10. 4. 31 32 33. TRIPS. 108 2004 47. 1. 4. 22 20. 34. 8. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(16) TRIPS. Restatement (First) of Torts (1939) 35. 757. trade secret 。 36. 1 。 37. 3. 政治大. Unfair Competition (1995). 立. 39. ‧ 國. 。. 」. io. sit. 3. n. al. 1839. er. 1839. 1996. y. The Economic Espionage Act of 1996. ‧. 39. 2016. Nat. 。. 38. 學. 」. Restatement (Third) of. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. (A). 35. Restatement (First) of Torts §757, comment b (1939), “A trade secret may consist of any for mula, pattern, device or compilation of information which is used in one's business, and which g ives him an opportunity to obtain an advantage over competitors who do not know or use it. It may be a formula for a chemical compound, a process of manufacturing, treating or preserving materials, a pattern for a machine or other device, or a list of customers.” 36 Uniform Trade Secrets Act (1985) §1(4), “"Trade secret" means information, including a formu la, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that: (i) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, a nd not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use, and (ii) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the c ircumstances to maintain its secrecy.” 37 2 24 38 1 31 Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition (1995) §39, “A trade secret is any information that can be used in the operation of a business or other enter prise and that is sufficiently valuable and secret to afford an actual or potential economic advant age over others.”. 39 1 29 9. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(17) (B) 40. 2016. 。. 」. (B) 。 41. 。. 1991 2 6. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. 43. ‧ y. Nat. 40. 42. sit. n. al. er. io. 98 1997 7 The Economic Espionage Act of 1996 §1839(3), “the term “trade secret” means all form s and types of financial, business, scientific, technical, economic, or engineering information, incl uding patterns, plans, compilations, program devices, formulas, designs, prototypes, methods, techn iques, processes, procedures, programs, or codes, whether tangible or intangible, and whether or h ow stored, compiled, or memorialized physically, electronically, graphically, photographically, or i n writing if—(A) the owner thereof has taken reasonable measures to keep such information secr et; and (B) the information derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not bei ng generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable through proper means by, the public.”. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 41. The Defend Trade Secrets Act (2016) §1839(3), “the term “trade secret” means all forms and types of financial, business, scientific, technical, economic, or engine ering information, including patterns, plans, compilations, program devices, formulas, designs, prot otypes, methods, techniques, processes, procedures, programs, or codes, whether tangible or intang ible, and whether or how stored, compiled, or memorialized physically, electronically, graphically, photographically, or in writing if—(A) the owner thereof has taken reasonable measures to keep such information secret; and (B) the information derives independent economic value, actual or p otential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable through proper means by, another person who can obtain economic value from the disclosure or use of the info rmation.” 42 World Intellectual Property Organization WIPO 2015 The term “trade secret” as used in this Act means technical or business information useful for business activities such as manufactur ing or marketing methods that is kept secret and that is not publicly known. http: //www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=401411 2018/07/09 43 73-80 2017 2 10. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(18) 44. 立. 政治大 45. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat express contract. Ch. v. contract implied in fact. e n g46c h i. i Un. 47. 〈. 48. 44 45 46 47 48. 1 43 11. 8 10 31. 1. 108-109. 1. 9. 9-10 31. 109. 1. 10. 11. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(19) equity. fiduciary relationship. duty of loyalty 49. 1917 Masland50. E.I. Dupont de Nemours Powder Co. v.. 1939. Restatement of Torts. 1917 。. 立. 政治大 1939 51. 757. a. ‧ 國. 學. good faith. ‧. io. 53. 」. n. al. sit. y. Nat. 52. er. good faith. a general duty of. v. breach of confidential relationship. ni C torthliability 54 i U engch. 55. 56. 〈. 1979 2. 49 50 51 52 53. 1. 757. 43 12-13 E.I. Dupont de Nemours Powder Co. v. Masland 244 U.S. 100 (1917). 43 15 1 12 43 15 23 268 1986. 54. 7. 11 70 201. 8. 55 56. 759. 43. 14-16. 239 1999 1. 10 11-12 12. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(20) 57. 〈 58. 59. 1930 60. 61. 立. ——. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. 。. 政治大. 62. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. 63. v. property or property right. 64. intangible property. intellectual. property 57. 1 13 Eric R. Claeys, Private Law Theory and Corrective Justice in Trade Secrecy, available at: http s://www.law.gmu.edu/assets/files/publications/working_papers/1114PrivateLawTheory.pdf (2011) (Last visited: 2018/07/09) 59 54 71 60 — 6 9 1997 11 — 22-23 1995 5 61 55 291-294 62 43 19 1 14 63 1 14-15 Claeys, supra note 58, at 9. 64 43 19 1 15 31 112 58. 13. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(21) Lamb v. Evans65. 1893. Peabody v. Norfork66. 1868 67. 1984. Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co.. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. 73. 65 66. Ch. engchi. i Un. Lamb v. Evans, 1 Ch 218. (1893) 12. 67. 9 1 68 69 70. 71 72 73. v. 24. 9. 42-44 1993 2 1 4. 1994 1 43 20 Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co., 467 U.S. 986 (1984). 43 20 1 16 43 20 43. 4 2005 21. 5 31. 1 17 113 115-116 14. 1. 17-18. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(22) 74. 75. TRIPS. 政治大. 76. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 77. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 78. 39. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 79. 80. 74 75 76. 29 2005 43 43. 77 78 79 80. 10 43 43 1. 9. 317 345-347 47-48 354-355 322-324 18. 31. 116-117. 1. 18. 15. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(23) 81. 82. 83. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. 81. 43. Ch. 327. 9 82 83. engchi. 31 30-31. 2 31. i Un. v. 117-118. 1. 18-1. 119 2. 31-31 16. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(24) TRIPS TRIPS. 〉 WTO. TRIPS TRIPS. 〈. TRIPS. 立. 84. 政治大 TRIPS. TRIPS. ‧ 國. 學. 2016. ‧. n. al. 。. Ch. ni know-how U engchi 》. know-. er. io. sit. y. Nat. how. 。. v. 85. (Code of Industrial. 84. ELIZABETH A. ROWE & SHARON K. SANDEEN, TRADE SECRECY AND INTERNATIO NAL TRANSACTIONS: LAW AND PRACTICE, 31(2015). 85 MELVIN F. JAGER, TRADE SECRETS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, §20:19, §10:3(2017). 17. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(25) Property) 86. Common law of confidence. 1896. Gesetz zur Bekämpfung 87. des unlauteren Wettbewerb, UWG 1896 88. TRIPS. 39. 2004. 2. 立. 89. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. 90. 政治大. Nat 91. n. al. er. io 3. 3. 19. sit. y. 17. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 92. 93. 。 86. European Commission, Study on Trade Secrets and Confidential Business Information in the In ternal Market, at 4. 87 1 23 88 43 23 89 43 29 90 43 33-34 91 43 34-36 92 1 25 17 19 43 39-61 93 1 26 43 30-31 18. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(26) 94. 2. 2018. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. 95. 96. 。. ‧. TRIPS. sit. al. 98. 2011. n. 99. Ch. engchi. TRIPS. 39. i Un. v. TRIPS. 〈〈. 39. 〈. TRIPS. 〈 100. 6:162 TRIPS. TRIPS. er. io. 2011. 39. y. Nat. 97. 6. 6:162. 101. 94. JAGER supra note 85, § 3:2. March 29, 2010, LJN: BL6871. JAGER supra note 85, § 28:2. 96 LJN: BJ278. Id. 97 Id. 98 The Hague Court of Appeal, March 27, 2011: GBT/AJINOMOTO (LJN: BP9490). Id. 99 Joined Cases C-300/98, Parfums Christian Dior SA v. Tuk Consultancy BV, and C-392/98, As sco Gerüste GmbH and R. van Dijk v. Wilhelm Layher GmbH & Co KG and Layher BV. 100 Article 6:162 of the Dutch Civil Code: Definition of a ‘tortious act’. JAGER supra note 85, § 28:2. 101 JAGER supra note 85, § 28:2. 19 95. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(27) 〈 39. 2018. TRIPS. 6. 102. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. 102. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. European Commission, supra note 86, at 24. 20. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(28) X Common. 立. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. al. X. X. X. X. Ch X. e n g cXh i. X. X. X. X. n. X. io. X. X. y. X. X. X. Nat. X. X. X. X. ‧. X. 103. X. sit. X. confidence. 學. X. ‧ 國. X. 政治大 X. er. X. law of. i n U. v. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X X. X. X. X X. X. X. X. X. 103. 21. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(29) Common law of confidence X X. 立. X X. X X. X. X X. X. al. X X. n. X. io. X. Ch. n engchi U X. X X. X. X. X. X. X. X X X X. iv. X X. X X X. X X. X. y. X. Nat. X. X. ‧. X. X. X. X. sit. X. X. ‧ 國. X. X. 學. X. X. 政治 X X 大. er. X. X X. X. X. X. X. European Commission, Study on Trade Secrets and Confidential Business Information in the Internal Market. 22. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(30) 104. 立. 政治大 39. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. TRIPS. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. 105 106. 104. 107. European Commission, supra note 86, at 4-5.. 105 106 107. European Commission, supra note 86, at 5. 23. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(31) 108. 109. 110. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. 111. 9. 108. Id. at 5-6.. 109 110 111. European Commission, supra note 86, at 31. Id. at 37. 24. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(32) IT 112. describe. 113. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學 ‧ Directive. io. sit. y. Nat. 2004/48/EC. 115. n. al. er. 114. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. 112. 113 114 115. European Commission, supra note 86, at 33. Id. at 7. Id. at 32-33. 25. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(33) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 26. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(34) X /. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. C Xh. X. X. n. a X l. X. e n gX c h iX X. X116. X X. X. X X. i vX n U X. X X. sit. X. Nat. X. X. er. X. X. y. X. X. ‧. X. 學. X. io. X. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大. X X117. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X X. 116 117. 27. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(35) /. 立. 政治大. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X X X. X. X. X. X. X. sit. X. X. X. er. al. X. X. Ch. n engchi U. X X. X. y. X. n. X. io. X. X. X. X. Nat. X. X. X. X X. X. ‧. ‧ 國. X. X. 學. X. X. X. iv. X X X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. 28. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(36) /. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. ‧. European Commission, Study on Trade Secrets and Confidential Business Information in the Internal Market. Nat. y. X. X. io. sit. X. X. n. al. er. X. 立 ‧ 國. X. 學. X. 政治大. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. 29. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(37) X ). X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X X. X X. X X. y. X. X X. ‧. X. 立. X. 學. X. 政 X治大. X. al. X. n. X. io. X. Nat. X. X. X X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. sit. (. X. Ch. engchi U. X. er. ). ‧ 國. (. X. v nXi. X. X X. X. X X. X118. X. X. X. X. 118. 30. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(38) ). X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. 立. X 政治大 X. ‧ 國. X. X X. X. X X. Nat. X. io. X. n. al. Ch. engchi U. X. v ni. X. X. X. X. X. X. X X. ‧. X. 學. X. X. y. (. X. sit. ). er. (. X X X. X. X. X. X X. X X. X119. European Commission, Study on Trade Secrets and Confidential Business Information in the Internal Market. 119. 31. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(39) X. describe. ‧. X. io. X. n. al. Ch. e n g cXh i U. X. sit. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. X. y. X. er. X. X. Nat. X. X. 學. X. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大. v ni. X X. X. X. X. X. X X. 32. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(40) describe. X. 立. X. X. X. ‧ 國. X. Ch. n e n g cXh i U X. y. X. sit. X X X. X. al. X. ‧. X. n. X. X. X. io. X. X. X. Nat. X. X. X. 學. X. X 政治 X 大. er. X. iv. X. X. X. X. X. European Commission, Study on Trade Secrets and Confidential Business Information in the Internal Market. 33. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(41) 2015 TRIPS TRIPS 120. 立. る「. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. る. 治政大の. 121. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. 、. v. … … 、. 122. 120 121 122. European Commission, supra note 86, at 3. Id. at 4. Id. at 6-7. 34. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(42) 、. る「「. の. 立 ‧ 國. 、. io. sit. y. 2016. n. al. er. 124. ‧. 2014. 11. Nat. 123. 學. 2013. 政治大. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 「. know-how. 「. know-how. 123. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure (2013) , COM/2013/0813 final - 2013/0402 (COD), Brussels. 124 Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on t he protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unla wful acquisition, use and disclosure (Text with EEA relevance), available at: http://eur-lex.europa. eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32016L0943&from=EN (Last visited: 2018/07/09) 35. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(43) 125. のる know-how 126. 「 127. 「. 。. 立の. y. sit. n. al. る. Ch. er. io 「. ‧. 、. Nat. 128. 「. 學. ‧ 國. 、. 政治大. i Un. る. e n g c「h i. v. 「 1. 1. 、. 125 126 127 128. Directive (EU) 2016/943, supra note 124, recital 1, 2. Id. recital 3. Id. recital 4. Id. recital 3, 4. 36. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(44) 129. 1. 、 2 6. 「. 9. 12. 「. 3. 、. 5. 10. 15. 11. る. る. 16 17. 18 19. 20. 21. 立 ‧ 國. 學. (1). (2). る. (3). 130. sit. io. 9. 10. y. Nat. 12. ‧. 12. 9 10. る. 10. n. al. 「. er. 16. 政治大. Ch. e n gるc h i. i U n「. 12. v「の. 17. 131. るの 18. 129 130 131. (1). 2021. 9 4 Directive (EU) 2016/943, supra note 124, art.16. Id. art.17. 37. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(45) 6. 9 、. (2). 2022. 6. 9 (3). 2026. 6. 9 132. 19. (1). 2018. 6. 9. (2) 133. 20. 立. 21. 政治大. 134. 135. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. 「. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat 2. Ch. engchi. 、. 132 133 134 135. Id. Id. Id. Id.. 「. i Un. v. 、. art.18. art.19. art.20. art.21. 38. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(46) 2 (1). (a) (b). (c) 136. TRIPS TRIPS. 2. (2). (3). (4). 、 137. 、 know-how 138. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. 2(1)(a). ‧. の. n. al. 140 141. Ch. engchi. er. io. 139. sit. y. Nat. の. i Un. v. 142. 136. Id. art.2(1). Id. art.2(2)(3)(4). 138 Proposal for a Directive on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure, available at: http://eur-lex.eur opa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52013PC0813&from=EN (Last visited: 2018/07/09) 139 Natalja Sosnova, EU Directive Proposal: Trade Secrets, 20 Marq. Intell. Prop. L. Rev. 45, 5 1. (2016) 140 Katarzyna A. Czapracka, Antitrust and Trade Secrets: The U.S. and the Eu Approach, 24 San ta Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 207, 225-226 (2008). 141 Id. at 234-235. 142 Natalja Sosnova, supra note 139, at 51. 39 137. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(47) 2(1)(b) る. の. 143. 2(1)(c). 立. 144. —. 學. 145. y. Nat. 2(4). n. al. る. er. io る. ‧. 2(2). sit. の. ‧ 國. —. 政治大. Ch 「. engchi. i Un. v. 10 る. TRIPS 146. る. る. る 143. Directive (EU) 2016/943, supra note 124, recital 14. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Shreveport, Inc. v. Coca-Cola Co., 107 F.R.D. p.288-289 (D. Del. 1985) 145 Natalja Sosnova, supra note 139, at 54. 146 2014 3 85 2014 9 40 144. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(48) 147. 、. 3. 、 (1). 、. (a). (b) (c) (d). (2). 、 148. 、. know-how. 政治大. 立 ‧ 國. 學 ‧. 、. 4. 、. Nat. io. y. al. i v(3). n. (a). (b). 、 (b). Ch. n U engchi (a). (4). 、、. 10bis. 149. TRIPS. 39(2). 151. 10. Natalja Sosnova, supra note 139, at.56. Directive (EU) 2016/943, supra note 124, art.3. Directive (EU) 2016/943 supra note 124, recital 17.. 150. 2. (5). 151. —. 148. 。. (c) 150. 147. 「. sit. (2). (1). 、. er. る. 149. 27 66 2015 2 Directive (EU) 2016/943, supra note 124, art.4. 41. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(49) 10bis TRIPS. 152. 10153. 39(2) 154. 155. 、. 5 、 (a). 「. ‧ 國. (c) (d). 157. io. al. er. sit. y. Nat. 158. 「. る. ‧. 156. 政治大學. (b). 立. の. n. iv n C Paris Convention art.10 bis,:“…(3) The particular shall be prohibited: (i) all acts h following i U with e g cinhwhatever of such a nature as to create confusion by anynmeans the establishment, the good 152. s, or the industrial or commercial activities, of a competitor; (ii) false allegations in the course o f trade of such a nature as to discredit the establishment, the goods, or the industrial or commer cial activities, of a competitor; (iii) indications or allegations the use of which in the course of t rade is liable to mislead the public as to the nature, the manufacturing process, the characteristic s, the suitability for their purpose, or the quantity, of the goods.” 153 TRIPS art.39, Notes 10:”For the purpose of this provision, “a manner contrary to honest com mercial practices” shall mean at least practices such as breach of contract, breach of confidence and inducement to breach, and includes the acquisition of undisclosed information by third partie s who knew, or were grossly negligent in failing to know, that such practices were involved in t he acquisition.” 154 Katarzyna A. Czapracka, supra note 140, at 272. 155 Id. at 210. 156 Directive (EU) 2016/943, supra note 124, art.5. 157 General approach to the proposal for a directive of the European parliament and of the counc il on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against thei r unlaeful acquisition, use and disclosure, COD (2013) 0402 (May 19, 2014), at recital 10b. 158 European parliament, committee on legal affairs, draft report on the proposal for a directive o f the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of undisclosed know-how and bu siness information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure, at 11. 42. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(50) 「. 「「 6. 9. 「. 「 10. 11. 「. 「 12. 15. 6. (1). 「 (a). 「. io. al. n. 159. 7. 「 Ch. (1) (b). i Un 「. engchi (c). る. 「. y. 、. (b). sit. ‧ 國. 6. (c). er. (2). 「. ‧. る. 「. Nat. 「. 立. 「. 學. 「. 政治大. 8 「. 「. v. (a) (2). 」、. 「. 」 15. 160. 7. 「. 「」. 「. 」」. 159 160. Directive (EU) 2016/943, supra note 124, art.6. Directive (EU) 2016/943, supra note 124, art.7. 43. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(51) 161. 「の. 「. の. 8. (1). 「 (2). 政治大 162. 、. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat 163. 9. Ch. engchi. 「. i Un. v. (1). る. 、 (a) 2(1). (b) の. (2). る. 161. Case 53/85, Akzo Chemie BV & Chemie UK Ltd. V. Comm’n, 1986 E.C.R. I01965, para.28. Natalja Sosnova, supra note 139, at.68. 162 Directive (EU) 2016/943, supra note 124, art.8. 163 Natalja Sosnova, supra note 139, at 69. 44. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(52) (a). (b). 、. (c) (3) る (4) 164. の …. 政治大. 、. 立. 「. 「. 「. 「. Nat. sit. io. al. n. 「. 「. er. 「. 「. 10 「. y. 「. …. ‧. の. ‧ 國. 「. 11. 學. 10. Ch. e n g「c h i. (a). i Un. v. (1). る (b). 、 (c). で (2). る 165. 、「. 164 165. 、. Directive (EU) 2016/943, supra note 124, art.9. Id. art.10. 45. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(53) 「 166. 11. 「「「. 11. (1). る. 「. る (a). る. (b). (c). 、 (2). 、. る (a). 政、治大. (c) (e). 立. (f). る. 10. al. n. 10. 2. sit. y. 31. er. io. 「. (3). ‧. (4). Nat. (b). 20. 、. (h). 「. ‧ 國. (a). (g). (d). 學. 10. る. (b). Ch. 「. n U e n g c hai. iv 「. 「. る (5) 、. 「 167. 11 の 168. 166 167 168. Id. recital 26. Id. art.11. Id. recital 21. 46. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(54) 「「」「」. 「. 「. 「 12. 「 15. 政治大. 「「. 立. 「. ‧. ‧ 國. 「. y. sit. al. る. n. (1). 、. Ch. i Un. v. e「n g c h i(a). (b). 、 (c). (d) 169. 12. 12. (2) (a). 169. 「. er. io. 12. 學. 12. の. Nat. 1.. 「. (b). c (c). Id. art.12(1). 47. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(55) 170. の「「 12 (3). る (4) 1. c. d. 「. 「 171. 、. 政治大「. 「る. 立. —. ‧ 國. 學. 172. (3) (1). n. a l 13 Ch. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 13. ‧. 2.. n U e(a)n g c h i. (c). 12. る. iv. (b) (d). 、 (e). 、 (f). (g) 12. 1. a. (h). b. 「、. 「. (2). る. 12. 1. a. b. 「 2. 173. 170 171 172 173. Id. Id. Id. Id.. 11. art.12(2). art.12(3)(4). recital 28. art.13(1)(2). 48. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(56) の. 「. の. 「「. 3. 13. (3). (3). 12 (a). 「. 、、. (b). (c). 「「. 政治大12. 立. ‧ 國 Nat. …. io. sit. y. …. n. al. er. 「. b. ‧. 175. a. 學. 174. 1. Ch. n U engchi. iv. る. 14 (1). る、、、. (2) 「「. 174 175. 、. Id. art.13(3). Id. recital 29. 49. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(57) 176. 、る. るる 177. 立 ‧ 國. 9. (3). n. al. sit. 、. er. io. 、. 、. y. Nat. 1 、. る. ‧. (2). (1). 學. 15. 政治大. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 178. る 179. 、. 2017. 10. 2018 176 177 178 179. Id. Id. Id. Id.. art.14. recital 30. art.15. recital 31. 50. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(58) 2018 2018. 2. 4. 政治大. 立. 9. 「 180. ‧ 國. 學. 「. の. ‧. る. y. Nat. sit. io. al. n 「. 「. er. の. 1. Ch. 「「. engchi. の. i Un. v. 「. 、「「「、. 「る. 「. 「の. 「. 180. Consultation on draft regulations concerning trade secrets, available at: https://www.gov.uk/gov ernment/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/682184/Consultation_Trade_Secrets_Directive.pdf (Last visited: 2018/07/09) 51. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(59) 「「の. わ. 政治大. のの. 立. 「. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 、、. 「. Ch. の. engchi. i Un. v. … の. — 「 52. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(60) 181. 2016 Uniform Trade Secret Act. 政治大 182. model law. 立. 學. ‧ 國. 183. 184. ‧. の. Economic Espionage Act of 1996. sit. 185. y. Nat. 「. 1996. n. al. 186. er. io. 「. Ch. engchi. i Un. 「. v. 187. 「. 181. 「. 40. 305. 182 183. 306 Uniform Law Commission 20Secrets%20Act 2018/05/31 185 40 306-307 186 19 366 184. http://www.uniformlaws.org/Act.aspx?title=Trade%. 187. 29. 4. 20-21 2017. 4 53. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(61) 1966 1979 1985 「 188. 「. る. 、. 「. 189. ‧. 757. n. al. Ch. b. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 1.. 「. 學. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大. 190. n U engchi. iv. (2). の. 188. 40. 313-314 40 99-100 Uniform Trade Secret Act (1985) §1(4). 190 Restatement(First) of Torts §757, commemt b (1939), “An exact definition of a trade secret is not possible. Some factors to be considered in determining whether given information is one's tr ade secret are: (1) the extent to which the information is known outside of his business; (2) the extent to which it is known by employees and others involved in his business; (3) the extent of v measures taken by him to guard the secrecy of the information; (4) the value of the informati on to him and to his competitors; (5) the amount of effort or money expended by him in devel oping the information; (6) the ease or difficulty with which the information could be properly ac quired or duplicated by others.” 54 189. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(62) 191. 192. 2.. John W. Shawa Advertising Inc. v. Ford. Motor Co. Richter v. Westab, Inc. 〈 193. 3.. 立. 政治「大. ‧ 國. 學 ‧. 4.. 194. sit. n. al. er. io. 195. y. Nat …. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 5.. 191. ─ 53 252 が 10 21-22 Kewanee Oil Co. v. Bicron Corp., 416 U.S. at 476. (1974) (Novelty, in the patent law sense, is not required for a trade secret. However, some novelty will be required, if merely because th at which does not possess novelty is usually known; secrecy, in the context of trade secrets, thu s implies at least minimal novelty.) 193 ─ 53 253 が 10 22-23 MELVIN F. JAGER, TRADE SECRE TS LAW VOL.1, at 5-84 (1989). 194 Gillette Co. v. Williams, 360 F. Supp. 1171, 1173, 178 U.S.P.Q. 327 (D. Conn. 1973). JAGE R, supra note 193 , at 5-92. ─ 53 257 195 が 10 26 55 192. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(63) 196. 197. …. 198. 治政大 12. 立 misappropriation. impropermeans. ‧ 國. 〈. 》. n. a202l. er. io. sit. y. ‧. 200. Nat. 201. 學. ─. 199. Ch. 。. engchi. i Un. v. 203. 204. 196. が 10 22-23 Elizabeth A. Rowe, Contributory Negligence, Technology, and Trade Secrets, 17 Geo. Mason L. Rev. 1, 9 (2009), available at: http://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/facultypub/89 (Last visited: 2018/07 /09) 198 Rowe, supra note 197, at 27-29. 199 40 314 200 Uniform Trade Secrets Act (1985) §1(1). 201 が 10 78 202 STEVEN J. STEIN, TRADE SECRET LITIGATION, 159-161 (1985). 203 Uniform Trade Secrets Act (1985) §1 comment. 204 Uniform Trade Secrets Act (1985) §1(2)(i) 56 197. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(64) 「 205. 。 ─. 立. 3. ‧ 國. ‧. 「. 2. 學. 206. 757 治政「の大. y. Nat. 207. n. al. Ch. engchi. er. io. sit. 6. i Un. v. 208. 5 、. 209. 205. Uniform Trade Secrets Act (1985) §1(2)(ii) DAVID W. QUINTO & STUART H. SINGER. TRADE SECRETS: LAW AND PRACTICE (2009). 207 43 213 Uniform Trade Secrets Act (1985) §6. 208 が 10 100 209 43 213 Uniform Trade Secrets Act (1985) §5. 57 206. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(65) 、 1.. 26(C) 210. 211. cognizable harm. relevance necessity. 212. 立. 26(C) 治政大. 214. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat 215. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 213. 216. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 2.. 210. —— 139 53 2006 12 211 See Humboldt Baykeeper v. Union Pacific R. Co., 244 F.R.D. 560,563 (N.D.Cal.,2007) 212 KIMBERLY A. MOORE & PAUL R. MICHEL & TIMOTHY R. HOLBROOK, PATENT LI TIGATION AND STRATEGY, at 190-191. (3rd ed. 2008) 213 Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). 11 8 60 2007 8 214 210 55 215 Bright House Networks, LLC v. Cassidy, 2014 WL 84237(Fla. 2d DCA Jan. 10 2014). 216. 68 187 2008 12 Mfg. Co., 35 F.R.D. 540, 543(E.D.N.Y. 1964). 58. See Triangle Mfg. Co. v. Paramount Bag. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(66) 217. 3.. の 218. 4.. 政治大 219. 立. … の. ‧ 國. 學 …. ‧. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 、. lead time 220. 217. JAGER, supra note 193, at 7-5,7-6.. 218. 1. 8. 7 1989. 1. 1 219 220. STEIN, supra note 202, at 197-198. 40 314-315 59. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(67) Temporary restraining order Preliminary Injunction. Permanent Injunction. 1. 「 221. 「. 65(b). (1) (A) (B) (2). 立. 14. 政治大. ‧ 國. ‧. Nat. sit. y. 222. (4). n. al. er. io 14. 學. (3). Ch. 223. engchi. i Un. v. 14 224. 221 222 223 224. ROBERT A. MATTEWS, ANNOTATED PATENT DIGEST, Chapter 32: 151 (2018). Federal Rules of Civil Procedure §65(b). QUINTO & SINGER supra note 206, at 103. Id. at 102. 60. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(68) 225. 2.. の 65(a). (1). (2). 226. 政治大 227. 立. (1). four-factor test. (a likelihood of success on the merits) (2). ‧ 國. 學. (a substantial threat that the plaintiff will. suffer irreparable injury if the injunction is denied) (3). (the threatened. of hardships favors the moving party) (4). y. sit. er. (Likelihood of Success). io. (1). 228. (the injunction will not disserve the. Nat. public interest ). ‧. injury outweighs any damage the injunction might cause to the defendant. i.e., the balance. n. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. (prima facie). る (2). 229. (Irreparable Injury). 225. Id. at 103.. 226. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure §65(a). QUINTO & SINGER supra note 206, at 104. Id. at 105. Id. at 107-108. 61. 227 228 229. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(69) 230. 231. の 232. 233. (Balancing the Hardships). 立 ‧ 國. ‧ y. Nat. 236. al. er. io. (Public Interest). n. (4). 234. 學. 235. 政治大. sit. (3). Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 237. 230. Id. at 106. Id. 232 Id. See Analogic Corp. v. Data Translation, Inc., 371 Mass. 643, 647-49, 358 N.E.2d 804, 80 7-08 (1976) (recognizing injunctive relief appropriate remedy for loss of head start due to wrongf ul appropriation of trade secrets and confidential business information.) But see Ossur Holdings, I nc. v. Bellacure, Inc., No.C05-1552JLR, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38750, at *22 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 14, 2005) (holding market disadvantage in loss of head start to be generalized threat of loss of revenue compensable by monetary damages). 233 Id. at 107. 234 58 136 2004 5 —— eBay 12 2 178 2015 12 235 QUINTO & SINGER supra note 206, at 108. 236 Id. 237 ── 62 231. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(70) 2006. ebay, Inc. v.. MercExchange, L.L.C238. … 239. Winter v. National Resources Defense Council240. 2009. 241. 3.. 政治大. 立 ‧ 國. sit. y. Nat. Conmar Rule. io. Head start rule or Winston Research Rule. n. al. Ch. Shellmar Rule る. engchi. er. Shellmar Rule. (1). lead-time or. ‧. 242. 學. head start. 2(a). i Un. v. Shellmar Products Co. v. Allen-Qualley Co.243 perpetual injunctions. 238. 209 260 2012 10 ebay, Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., 126 S. Ct. 1837, 1839, 164 L. Ed. 2d 641, 645-46 (200. 6). 239. 234. 165 1. 240 241 242 243. 377. —— 2010 10. Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, 129 S. Ct. 365, 371 (2008). 237 261 239 378-379 ELIZABETH A. ROWE & SHARON K. SANDEEN, supra note 84, at 56. Shellmar Products Co. v. Allen-Qualley Co., 87 F.2d 104, 32, U.S.P.Q. 24 (7th Cir. 1937). 63. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(71) 244. Conmar Rule. (2). Conmar Products Corp. v. Universal Slide Fastener Co.245. る. 247. 立. 246. Head start rule or Winston Research Rule. 學 ‧. ‧ 國. (3). 政治大. 248. Lead Time Injunction. Winston Research Winston. n. er. io. sit. Research Corp. v. Minnesota Min. & Mfg. Co.249. al. る. y. Nat. Winston Research. Ch. engchi. i U、n. v. lead time 250. …. 251. 244. 237 261-262 が 10 95-96 Conmar Products Corp. v. Universal Slide Fastener Co., 32, 172 F.2d 150, 80 U.S.P.Q. 108 (2nd Cir. 1949). 246 237 262 が 10 96 247 「 ( ) 176 2012 7 248 237 249 Winston Research Corp. v. Minnesota Min. & Mfg. Co., 350 F.2d 134, 142 (C.A.Cal. 1965). 250 が 10 96-97 251 1 290 64 245. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(72) 「. 252. 3. 1. 3(a). 253. actual loss reasonable royalty. 立. 政治大、. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. 「. unjust enrichment. 254. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. v. The American Institute of Certified Public Accountant, AICPA Practice Aid. Ch わ. engchi. i Un. 255. 256. agreement in principle 2. 3(b) 252. 237. 265. 253. 7 254 255. 20 2016. 11. 11. Uniform Trade Secrets Act (1985) §3. 8-9 13-14. 256. 65. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(73) (a) 257. の 258. 2(b). 政治大. 立 ‧ 國. 學. Republic Aviation Corp. v. Schenk259. ‧. 260. 13. Nat. n. al. er. io. sit. y. 「. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 」の 4 261. ─ 257 258 259 260 261. 2(c). Uniform Trade Secrets Act (1985) §3. ─ 53 296 Republic Aviation Corp. v. Schenk, 152 USPQ 830 (NY Sup. Ct 1967) が 10 98-99 Uniform Trade Secrets Act (1985) §4. 66. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(74) 262. affirmative acts. 263. 264. Actual or threatened misappropriation 265 266. 立. 、政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. io. 1919. n. al. Kodak v. Powers Film Products. er. 267. sit. y. Nat. 、. iv. Eastman. n C h268 U e n g c h i Powers Film Products. 262. Uniform Trade Secrets Act (1985) §2: QUINTO & SINGER, supra note 206, at 123. 264 Jessica Lee, The Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine: Safeguarding The Privacy of Trade Secrets, 33-oct Colo. Law. 17, 17 (2004). 265 QUINTO & SINGER, supra note 206, at 90. 266 Ryan M. Wiesner, Comments: A State-By-State Analysis of Inevitable Disclosure: A Need for Uniformity and A Workable Standard, 16 Marq. Intell. Prop. L. REV. 211, 216 (2012). 263. 267. 40 49-50 2015 10 See Eastman Kodak v. Powers Film Products 190 App. Div. 928 (N.Y. App. Div. 1919). Ele anore R. Godfrey, Inevitable Disclosure of Trade Secrets: Employee Mobility v. Employer’s Right s, 3 J. HIGH TECH. L. 161, 169 (2004). necessarily. 268. 203. 21. 2015. 10 67. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(75) 269. 1960 B. F. Goodrich Co. v. Wohlgemuth270. 1963. る. る 1964. E. I. Dupont v. American Potash271. 272. 273. inevitability of disclosure. る. 1995 Inc. v. Redmond わ. る 274. る. Redmond. 政治大 Redmond. 1994. 立. Redmond. ‧ 國 n. er. io. sit. 275. al. Redmond. y. uncanny ability. Nat 276. ‧. Redmond. Quaker. 學. 、. PepsiCo. ni C hわ U engchi. v. 277. 269 270. See B. F. Goodrich Co. v. Wohlgemuth 192 N. E.2d 99, 137 U.S.P.Q. 804 (Ohio Ct. App. 1 963). 271 See E. I. Dupont de Nemours & Co. v. American Potash & Chemical Corporation, 200 A.2d 428, 435-36 (Del. Ch. 1964). 272 267 50 273 268 21-22 274 PepsiCo Inc. v. William E. Redmond, Jr., 54 F.3d 1262, 1269 (7th Cir. 1995). 265 50 275 Id. at 1264-1272. 267 50 268 22 276 267 50 277. 47. 2015. 7 68. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(76) の. …. …. 278. 279. 《 PepsiCo. …の. 280. 立. 學. ‧ 國. わ. 政治大の 281. …. 282. ‧. PepsiCo. Nat. n. al. Ch. engchi U. er. io. —. sit. y. 283. v ni. Central Valley General Hospital v. Smith. 284. 285. の 278. QUINTO & SINGER, supra note 206, at 120. Shannon Aaron, Using the History of Non-Competition Agreements to Guide the Future of the Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine, 17 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 1191, 1200 (2013). 280 QUINTO & SINGER, supra note 206, at 92-101. 281 277 84-86 282 QUINTO & SINGER, supra note 206, at 97. 283 See PepsiCo Inc. v. William E. Redmond, Jr., supra note 272, at 1268. 284 268 25 285 Central Valley General Hospital v. Smith ,75 Cal. Rptr. 3d 771 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008). 69 279. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(77) 286 287 288. る. 289. —. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. 290. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 291. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 292. る 293. 286. Id. at 792.. 287. 267 51 QUINTO & SINGER, supra note 206, at 94-101. 268 24-25 Godfrey, supra note 268, at 174-178. Id. at 176. 267 51. 288 289 290 291. 292 293. Godfrey, supra note 268, at 177. Michael R. Levinson & Timothy J. Gerend, New US Doctrine Aids in Trade Secrets, Intellect 70. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(78) 294. の. の. 政治大. 立 ‧ 國. ‧. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 「. 學. 「. 「. ual Property Center (1998). 10 10 294 8 98. C「 h. engchi. i Un. v. ○ 34. 1998. 10 71. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(79) 295. 「. ‧. 297. 「. n. al. 299. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 298. 「. 學. 296. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 300. 295. 187 20 QUINTO & SINGER, supra note 206, at 31. Del. Code §2001(4) (2011). 187 21 297 QUINTO & SINGER, supra note 206, at 36. 298 Id. at 125. 299 8 87 187 21 300 James Pooley, The Myth of the Trade Secret Troll: Why the Defend Trade Secrets Act Impro ves the Protection of Commercial Information, 23 Geo. Mason L. Rev., 1045, 1067-1068 (2016). 72 296. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(80) 301. … 302. 「 Peter Toren. 「「 303. 「 … 「. の. 304. 政治大. 立. 「 …. 學. 5. 11. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 2016. ‧. ‧ 國. 「. 「. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 「. 301. R. Mark Halligan, Revisited 2015: Protection of U.S. Trade Secret Assets: Critical Amendmen ts to the Economic Espionage Act of 1996, 14 J. MARSHALL REV. INTELL. PROP. L. 476., 494(footnotes omitted) (2015). 302 David S. Levine, Sharon K. Sandeen, Here Come the Trade Secret Trolls, 71 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. Online, 230, at 249-250, 254 (2015). 303 Peter J. Toren, An Analysis of Economic Espionage Act Prosecutions: What Companies Can Learn From It and What the Government Should Be Doing About It!, 84 Pat. Trademark & Cop yright J. (BNA) No. 2081, at 884 (Sept. 21, 2012), available at: http://petertoren.com/wp-content/ uploads/2011/05/toren-eea2.pdf. (Last visited: 2018/07/09) 304 Pooley supra note 300, at 1068. 73. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(81) 112 305. Hatch. 2015. Coons. 113 114 306. 2015. 87. 0. 410. 307. 2 …. 政治大 308. …. 「. ‧. 309. 學. 「. ‧ 國. 立. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. 「. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 310. 305. S. 3389, Protecting American Trade Secrets and Innovation Act of 2012, 112th Cong. (2012); S.2267, Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2014, 113th Cong. (2014). 306 H.R. 3326, Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2015, 114th Cong. (2015); S.1890, Defend Trade Se crets Act of 2016, 114th Cong. (2015) 307 Pooley supra note 300, at 1045-1047.; Bill History Congressional Record References, availabl e at: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/1890/actions?q=%7B%22search%22%3 A%5B%22Defend+Trade+Secrets+Act%22%5D%7D (Last visited: 2018/07/09) 308 Pooley supra note 300, at 1045. 309 IP Commission, The Report of the Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Propert y, at 39-45, available at: http://www.ipcommission.org/report/ip_commission_report_052213.pdf (Las t visited: 2018/07/09) 310 Committee on the Judiciary, H. Rept. 114-529 - DEFEND TRADE SECRETS ACT OF 2016, at 2-6, available at: https://www.congress.gov/114/crpt/hrpt529/CRPT-114hrpt529.pdf (Last visited: 2018/07/09) 74. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(82) 「. 311. の 312. の. 「. 政治大「. 立. の. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 7. Ch. ni 「 U engchi. 2 3 18. 「. v. 7. 90. 「 1831. 1839. 「. 311 312. Halligan, supra note 301, at 493-494. Pooley supra note 300, at 1069. 75. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(83) 4. (1). (2) (3) (4) (5). (6). 政治大. 立. (7). ‧. ‧ 國. 學. Nat. 313. n. al. er. io. sit. y. 「. (8). 「. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 5 の 18. 90 「 314. 313. 6. Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016, sec.4 Report on theft of trade secrets. occurring abroad. 314. Id. at sec. 5 Sense of Congress. 76. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(84) 2. 315. のの. 政治大「「. 學. ‧ 國. 立「. ‧. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. …. Ch. engchi. i Un. —. v. 「. (A) (B). 「「. 315 316. 316. 「. Id. at sec. 6 Best practices. 18 U.S.C. §1839 (3). 77. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(85) 317 318. の Richdale Development Co. v. McNeil Co., Inc. の. の. 319. る. misappropriation 321. 學. impropermeans. 政治大. ‧ 國. 立. 320. る. ‧. 322. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. trespass. 323. 317. Compare NEB. REV. STAT. ANN. § 87-502 (stating a trade secret derives its value from “n ot being known to, and not being ascertainable by proper means”). 318 See First Express Services Group, Inc. v. Easter, 840 N.W.2d at 474 (Neb.2013). (recognizing that the omission of the words generally and readily eliminated any qualification of the words k nown or ascertainable, thus if information is capable of being known or ascertained by any mean s, it does not meet the definition of a trade secret, and noting that a simple phone call made th e information ascertainable). 319 See Richdale Development Co. v. McNeil Co., Inc. 508 N.W.2d at 860 (Neb. 1993). 320 Brennan R. Block, Nebraska Trade Secret Protection: The Forum Selection Conundrum Facin g Trade Secret Owners After the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016, 50 Creighton L. Rev. 559, 578-579 (2017). 321 18 U.S.C. §1839 (5). Uniform Trade Secrets Act (1985) §1(2). 322 323. 18 U.S.C. §1839 (6)(B). Ala. Code §8-27-2(2) (1987) 78. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(86) 324 325. る. る. 政治(1) 大. 326. 立. (2) 327. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. 328. n. al. 1833. er. io. sit. y. Nat 、. 、. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 329. 、. 5. る. 324 325 326 327 328 329 330. Brown &. 」. Williamson Tabacco Corp. v. Wigand. の. 330. Cal. Civ. Code §3426.1(2011). 187 23 QUINTO & SINGER, supra note 206, at 308. 187 23 18 U.S.C. §1833 (b)(1). 18 U.S.C. §1833 (b)(3)(4)(5). 18 U.S.C. §1833 (b)(2). Brown & Williamson Tabacco Corp. v. Wigand, 913 F. Supp. 530 (W.D. Ky. 1996) 79. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(87) Baker v.. 」 General Motors Corp.. 331. の. 」. 332 333. 政治大. の. 立. 334. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. 「. 「. の. y. Nat. 「. n. al. er. io. sit. 「. Ch. engchi. i Un. 「. v. 1837 335. (1). (2). 331. Baker v. General Motors Corp., 86 F.3d 811 (8th Cir. 1996), rev’ d, 118 S. Ct. 657 (1998). Peter S. Menell, Tailoring A Public Policy Exception to Trade Secret Protection, 105 Cal. L. Rev. 1, at 63 (2017). 333 James Gobert & Maurice Punch, Whistleblowers, the Public Interest, and the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998, 63 MOD. L. REV. 25, 35. (2000). 334 Menell, supra note 332, at .48-50. 335 18 U.S.C. §1833 (b)(1). 80 332. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(88) 336. 「. 337. 「 …. … で. で 338. で personal jurisdiction contacts. minimum 339. forum non conveniens. 340. 立. 「. 政治大「. n. al. er. io. sit. y. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. Nat. 「「. Ch. 341. engchi. i Un. v. minimum contacts. 336. 8 90 18 U.S.C. §1837. Michael L. Rustad, The Negligent Enablement of Trade Secret Misappropriation, 22 Santa Cla ra Computer & High Tech. L.J., 455, 483 (2006). 338 Robin Effron, Trade Secrets, Extraterritoriality, and Jurisdiction, Wake Forest Law Review, V ol. 51, No. 6, 2016; Brooklyn Law School, Legal Studies Paper No. 475., at 790-791 (2016), av ailable at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2896137 (Last visited: 2018/07/09) 339 personal jurisdiction forum non conveniens Sinochem I nternational Co. Ltd. v. Malaysia International Shipping Corporation 4 2 527 530 2008 12 340 2013 1 3 671 337. 341. 81. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(89) る 342. (1) (2) 343. 「 344. 345. 「. 立. 346. y. sit. er. al. ‧ 國. n. 1.. alternative forum. ‧. わ. 學. forum non conveniens. io. 348. 政治大. Nat. 347. で. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. (Deference to Plaintiff’s choice of forum). 349. 342. Alan M. Trammell & Derek E. Bambauer, Personal Jurisdiction and the "Interwebs", 100 Co rnell L. Rev., 1129, 1139 (2015). 343 Id. at 1140-1142. 344 United States v. Sinovel Wind Group Co., 794 F.3d at 789-790. (7th Cir. 2015). 345 Effron, supra note 338, at 774-779. 346 Sharon K. Sandeen, The DTSA: The Litigator's Full-Employment Act, 72 Wash. & Lee L. Re v. Online, 308, 312 (2015). See also Christopher B. Seaman, The Case Against Federalizing Tra de Secrecy, 101 Va. L. Rev., 387-390 (2015). 347 Effron supra note 338, at 780. 339 527 348 Id. 349 Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno, 454 U.S. 235, 255-256. (1981) 82. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(90) 350. 2.. (Adequate alternative forum ). Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno 351. 「. 352. 3.. (Private Interest factors). 政治「大 United States v. Sinovel Wind Group Co. 353. の. ‧ sit. n. al. er. io. 4.. 355. y. Nat. 356. 354. 學. ‧ 國. 立. (Public Interest factors). Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 357. 350. Donald Earl Childress III, When Erie Goes International, 105 Nw. U. L. Rev. 1531, 1560-15 66 (2011). 351 See Piper, supra note 349, at 254. 352 Effron, supra note 338, at 784. 353 Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501, 508. (1947). 354 See Sinovel, supra note 344. 355 See Piper, supra note 349, at 243. 356 Effron, supra note 338, at 787. 357 Effron, supra note 338, at 788. 83. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(91) 358. る 359. 360. 政治大 361. 65. の. 學. 「. ‧. 1836. ‧ 國. 立. Nat. n. al. er. io. sit. y. (1). Ch. engchi. i Un. v. (2) (3). 362. の. 358 359 360. Id. at 787-788. 339 539 Childress, supra note 350, at 1537.. 361 362. 18 U.S.C. §1836 (3)(A)(i)(ii)(iii). 84. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(92) 363. 364. 、. 學. 365. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大 366. ‧. 367. n. al. Ch. er. io. sit. y. Nat. る. i Un. v. e n g c h i368. 363. S. 1890, 114th Cong. § 2(a) (2015): “provided the order does not prevent a person from acc epting an offer of employment under conditions that avoid actual or threatened misappropriation.” 364 Pooley supra note 300, at 1073. 365 Letter from Professor Brook K. Baker et al. to the Sponsors of the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2014 (S. 2267) and the Trade Secrets Protection Act of 2014 (H.R. 5233) (2014), at 6, avail able at: http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/files/blogs/FINAL%20Professors'%C20Letter%C20Opposing%C2 0Trade%C20Secret%20Legislation.pdf. (Last visited: 2018/07/09) 366 Letter from Professor Eric Goldman et al. to Senator Charles E. Grassley et al. in Opposition to the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2015 (S. 1890, H.R. 3326) (2015), at 5, available at: http:// papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2699760. (Last visited: 2018/07/09) 367 See Kenneth S. Canfield and Douglas L. Clark, New Federal Trade Secret Act Expands Trad e Secret Rights, available at: http://www.jonesday.com/new-federal-trade-secret-act-expands-trade-sec ret-rights-05-13-2016/ (Last visited: 2018/07/09). 「 2016 5 http://www.copyrightnote.org/ArticleContent.aspx?ID=8&aid=2774 2018/07/09 8 92 368 Pooley supra note 300, at 1074-1075. 85. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(93) 1. Molon Motor & Coil Corporation v. Nidec Motor Corporation369 Molon. Desai. 立. Molon. Nidec. Nidec. 學. Desai (1). (2). al. n. 369. sit. Molon. er. io Nidec. y. Nat. (3). Molon. ‧. ‧ 國. Desai. 政治Desai 大 Molon Molon Nidec. Nidec. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. Molon Motor & Coil Corp. v. Nidec Motor Corp., 2017 WL 1954531 (N.D. Ill. May 11, 20. 17) 86. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(94) 370. 2. Fres-co Sys. USA, Inc. v. Hawkins371 Hawkins. Fres-co. Fres-co. Transcontinental. Fres-co Hawkins. Fres-co. Hawkins Fres-co. る Fres-co. Hawkins Fres-co. Hawkins. Hawkins. Fres-co. 立. Hawkins Fres-co. likely use Hawkins. Fres-co. Hawkins Hawkins. Fres-. 372. Fres-co. ‧. co. の. Fres-co. 學. ‧ 國. Hawkins Hawkins. Fres-co治政大 Hawkins Transcontinental. Transcontinental. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 373. Hawkins Hawkins likely use. Fres-co. 374. 370. Richard Gauthier, The inevitable disclosure doctrine and the DTSA, available at: http://www.fo rdhamiplj.org/2017/11/27/inevitable-disclosure-doctrine-dtsa/ (Last visited: 2018/07/09) 371 Fres-co Sys. USA, Inc. v. Hawkins, 690 F. App'x 72 (3d Cir. 2017) 372 Id. 373 Erik Weibust & Andrew Stark, The Third Circuit Addresses the Defend Trade Secrets Act an d Appears to Have Applied the Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine, available at: https://www.tradesecre tslaw.com/2017/07/articles/dtsa/the-third-circuit-addresses-the-defend-trade-secrets-act-and-appears-to-ha ve-applied-the-inevitable-disclosure-doctrine/ (Last visited: 2018/07/09) 374 See Fres-co, supra note 371, at 76. “Given the substantial overlap (if not identity) between H awkins’s work for Fres-co and his intended work for Transcontinental—same role, same industry, and same geographic region—the District Court was well within its discretion to conclude Hawki ns would likely use his confidential knowledge to Fres-co’s detriment.” 87. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(95) Fres-co. る 3. Panera, LLC v. Nettles. 375. Panera. Nettles Nettles Panera. Panera. Panera. Nettles. Panera Nettles. る Nettles. Panera. Papa John’s Pizza. Panera. Nettles Nettles. 政 Papa治John’s大 Pizza Panera. 學. Panera. 376. ‧. ‧ 國. 立. Nettles. Papa John’s Pizza. Nat. 377. n. al. er. io. sit. y. る. わ. C378h. engchi. i Un. v. 375. Panera, LLC v. Nettles, 2016 WL 4124114 (E.D. Mo. Aug. 3, 2016) Id. at 4. “By virtue of his position with Panera, Nettles was privy to Panera's substantial con fidential and trade secret information directly affecting Panera's actual and prospective developme nt of integrated technology systems, including ongoing business strategy. His employment as a te chnology executive at Papa John's is likely to draw upon, as a matter of course, his experience and knowledge with regard to Panera's confidential systems and business strategy.” 377 Id. “Although Missouri has not formally adopted the doctrine of inevitable disclosure—and ne ither has the Eighth Circuit, with regard to federal trade secrets claims—the Court finds the ratio nale underpinning such a theory helpful to understanding why Nettles' performance of his new ro le would almost certainly require him to draw upon and use trade secrets and the confidential str ategic planning to which he was privy at Panera.” 378 Id. 88 376. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(96) 379. わ. る. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. Nat. n. al. er. io. sit. y. る. る. Ch. 380. engchi. i Un. v. 381. 382. 379. Paul M. Mersino, What We Know and What is to Come the Defend Trade Secrets Act Turns One Year Old, 59 No. 7 DRI For Def. 52 (2017). 380 Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016, sec. 5 Sense of Congress. 381 18 U.S.C. §1836 (b)(2)(E). 382 18 U.S.C. §1836 (b)(2)(C). 89. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(97) 383 384. 385. 政治大. (1). 65. (2). 學. (3). ‧ 國. 立. 386. (5). ‧. (4). (6). Nat. sit. y. (7). io. n. al. er. (8) (2). Ch. n U engchi. iv. 387. (1) (3) 、. D. (4). る (5)る. (6). 383. 18 U.S.C. §1836 (b)(2)(D). 18 U.S.C. §1836 (b)(2)(H). 385 18 U.S.C. §1836 (b)(2)(G). 386 18 U.S.C. §1836 (b)(2)(A)(i); Joseph Brees, Trade Secrets Go Federal Parade to Follow, 12 J. Bus. & Tech. L. 277, 283 (2017). 8 91 387 18 U.S.C. §1836 (b)(2)(A)(ii); Id.; 90 384. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(98) 388. 389. で 390. Trade secret troll. で. 立. 「政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. io. n. al. 391. Ch. e n「g c h i. sit. y. Nat. grab-and-go. er. 1.. i Un. v. 337. 337 392. exclusion order 393. 「. 388. 18 U.S.C. §1836 (b)(2)(B). 18 U.S.C. §1836 (b)(2)(F). 390 Levine & Sandeen, supra note 302, at 255. 391 19 U.S.C. §1337 (2012). 392 337 337 2015 9 393 Eric Goldman, Ex Parte Seizures and the Defend Trade Secrets Act, 72 Wash. & Lee L. Re v., Online 284, 295-297 (2015), available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr-online/vol 72/iss2/4 (Last visited: 2018/07/09) 91 389. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(99) 394. 「、. 「 395. 「の. 「. 立. 」. 學. 「. ‧. 2.. ‧ 國. 「. 政治大. 396. n. Ch. engchi. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. i Un. v. 397. 394 395 396 397. Id. at 298. Levine & Sandeen, supra note 302, at 254. Goldman, supra note 393, at 305. Levine & Sandeen, supra note 302, at 255. 92. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(100) 「の 398. 399. る. 「. 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. al. 「. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 65. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. …. 1. Baleria Caribbean Ltd. Corp. v. Calvo400 Calvo Calvo. Calvo 398 399 400. Brees, supra note 386, at 285-290. Levine & Sandeen, supra note 302, at 256. Baleria Caribbean Ltd. Corp. v. Calvo, No. 16-23300, (S.D.Fla. Aug. 5, 2016) 93. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(101) Calvo 65 Calvo 401. …. 2. OOO Brunswick Rail Mgmt. v. Sultanov402 Brunswick 65. Sultanov. 立. 政治大 65. ‧ 國. 學. Google. 65 Rackspace. ‧. 403. y. Nat. Mission. n. al. er. io. sit. 3. Mission Capital Advisors LLC v. Romaka404. Romaka. Ch. Mission. engchi. i Un. v. 65,000. 65. 401 402 403 404. Id. OOO Brunswick Rail Mgmt. v. Sultanov, 2017 WL 67119 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 6, 2017) Id. Mission Capital Advisors LLC v. Romaka, No. 1:16-cv-05878, (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 29, 2016) 94. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(102) 405. 406. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. AVX. ‧. 4. AVX Corp. v. JunHee Kim, No. 17-0624, D.S.C.407 Kim. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. AVX. Mission. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. USSPeedo 5 Inc. v. Pierce408. 405 406 407 408. Mersino, supra note 379, at 5-6. See Mission, supra note 404. AVX Corp. v. JunHee Kim, No. 6:17-cv-00624 (D.S.C. Mar. 8, 2017) USSPeedo 5 Inc. v. Pierce, No. 17-108876-CB (Genesee Country, Michigan) 95. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(103) 65 65 るで. ののる. 立. 政治大. る. Nat. n. al. er. io. sit. y. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 409. の. Cの h. engchi. i Un. v 410. 411. 「. 412. 409. …. 18 U.S.C. §1836 (b)(3)(B); 18 U.S.C. §1836 (b)(3)(C); 18 U.S.C. §1836 (b)(3)(D).. 410 411. Michelle Evans, Plausibility Under the Defend Trade Secrets Act, 16 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 205-206 (2017). 412 8 94 96. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(104) 「. 「. 「. 」. …. 政治大の. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 sit. る. n. al. er. io る. る. y. Nat. で. る. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. る. の「 413. 、. の. 413. Block, supra note 320, at 581. 97. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(105) 414. 415. の. (a). 「. 立. 政治大. n. a l (A) Ch. y. er. io. sit. Nat. (c). ‧. ‧ 國. 學 (b). engchi. i Un. v. (B) 「. 414. Anand B. Patel & Jeffrey A. Pade & Victoria Cundiff & Bradford Newman, The Global Har monization of Trade Secret Law: The Convergence of Protections for Trade Secret Information in the United States and European Union, 83 Def. Couns. J., 472, 473 (2016). 415 Anand B. Patel & Jeffrey A. Pade & Victoria Cundiff & Bradford Newman, A Quick Guide Comparing the Defend Trade Secrets Act and the EU Trade Secrets Directive, available at: https: //www.paulhastings.com/publications-items/details/?id=4071e969-2334-6428-811c-ff00004cbded (Last visited: 2018/07/09) 98. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(106) 「 •. •. •. •. •. • •. 立 ‧ 國. y. •. io. n. al. Ch. •. engchi. sit. •. er. •. ‧. •. Nat. •. 學. •. 政治大. i Un. v. る. •. •. • 「. 99. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(107) •. •. の. 、. •. •. 學. •. ‧. ‧ 國. 立. 政• 治大. 、. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. •. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. の. •. 100. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(108) •. •. •. •. る. •. 、. 立. 政 • 治大の. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. •. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. •. 、 •. •. •. 101. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(109) •. • •. •. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 102. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(110) 11. 「. 13. 「「「. 1996 「. 立. 「. ‧ 國. 學. 2. ‧. の. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 10. 政治大. Ch. e n g c2 h i. i Un. v. 416. 416. 2. 25 103. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(111) 417. 418. TRIPS. TRIPS 419. TRIPS TRIPS. 立. 政治大. 「「. ‧ 國. 學る. ‧. る. sit. n. al. Ch. 2826. engchi. er. io 88. y. Nat. 《. 420. i Un. 421. v. 422. 423. 「「. 417 418 419. 40 43 43. 101-102 374 375. 420. 11 2002. 3. 421. 178 422 423. 8-9 2013 88 40. 10 2826 103 104. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(112) 424. 「. 《. 《 425 426 427. 《. 428. 430. 立. 429. 政治大 431. ‧ 國 432. y. al. 435. ─. n. 43. sit. 433. Ch. 376. i Un. engchi. 1. 425. 420. 《. er. io. 424. ‧. 《. Nat 434. 學. ─. v. 71-72 12. 1. 72. 426. 64 53-54. 2013. 427. 2 1 73 100. 88 420. 40. 104. 1 40. 78 104. 430. 432 433. 8 21. 431. 98. 26. 347 96. 434. 102 238. 435. 5. 174. 428 429. 202 94. 2. 2013 12 4273 98. 55 235. 26. 105. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(113) 、 436. 10. 437. 、》 438. 政治大. 439. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 y. sit. n. al. er. io. 3. Nat. 1. 440. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 441. 442. 436 437. 420. 438 439 440 441. 84 442. 65. 89 1 123 1995 89-90 1 116. 21 60 21. 361 362. 101 2. 6. 16. 106. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(114) 443 444. 445. 政治大. 446. 立 ‧ 國. 學 9. ‧. 447. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. 448. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 「. 「. 「 11. 「. 443. 21. 444 445. 1. 446 447. 441 116 441. 363. 90 90-91. 23 46 、. 11. 441. 91. 27 21. 、 448. 12. 364. 107. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(115) 13 《「. 11. 1 449. 政治大 450. 立. 11. 2. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. 451. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. e106n g c h i. i Un (. ). v. 452. 1. 453. 《《. 449. 1. 450 451 452 453. 40 106. 132 441 93 441 94 155-156 ( ). 1 108. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(116) 12 13 《 454. 2. 立. 455. 學. ‧ 國. 197. 政治大 13. ‧. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 216. 456. 87. 454. 44. 96. 455. 21 21. 456 457. 87. 457. 263. 366-367 367. 1 1. 131 133. 263 109. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(117) 13. 12. 216 216. 188. 160. 《 458. 政治大 1. 學. 1. ‧. ‧ 國. 立 13. 《. n. al. 1. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 89. 《. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 《. 459. 96. 13. 1. 12. 460. 1 。. 458 459 460. 95 1. 1043 133-134 96. 12 110. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(118) 1. 4000 7000 500. 《 95. 2. 7000. 11. 《. 《. 政治大學. 13. 1. ‧. ‧ 國. 立. 2. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 461. n. al. 462. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. の 463. 103. る (. ). 115. 14. 6. 461. 1. 462 463 464. 464. 1 103. 134 30 2010. 6. 135 ( ). 115 111. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(119) Maxleader 13. 1. 2. 68,553,654 12%. 97 500. 12. 13. 1. 2. 500. Maxleader. 政治大. …. ‧. 13. 學. ‧ 國. 立. 2. 465. n. al. Ch. engchi. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 「. i Un. v. 466. 467 468. 102. 469. 6. 102. 465. 3. 12. 《 219. 2005. 8. 466. 30. 467. 1. 468. 1998 469. 1. 152 2001. 1. 136-137 1. 58-61. 7 102. 6 112. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(120) 33 13. 3. 32. 3. 1. 「「「. る. 105. 學. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大 5,084. ‧. る. y. Nat. n. al. 2247. 639. Ch. engchi. er. io. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. sit. 3. 15. 4,315. i Un. 3. v. 3. 2000 368. 2 470. 368. 471. 376-2 18. 470. 1 433. 2. 2009. 3. 471. 32. 6. 159-160 2003. 11 113. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(121) 《. 368. 376-2. 472. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. Nat. n. al. er. io. sit. y. ‧. 370. Ch. n U engchi. 《. iv. 473. 《 474. 《 475. 472. 176. 473. 17. 10. 40 2013. 10. 474 475. 104. 192 2017. 12 114. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(122) 18. 2. 《 476. 371. 1. 234. 477. 《. 373. 立. 政治大. 478. 《 479. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. Nat. n. al. er. io. sit. y. 480. 481. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 482. 106 483. 22 476. 473 471. 477. 41 194. 478. 76. 3-64. 2001. 479. 21. 480. 349 471. 481. 483. 40-41 2008 17. 2013. 9. 367-1 180. 482. 5. 6. 9. 10. 10 106. 22 115. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.

(123) ─. (1) (2). 立. 政治大 (1). ‧. ‧ 國. 學 (2). er. io. sit. y. Nat. ─. n. a2008.7-2009.12 iv l C n h e n g c h i U 485 486 ─. 484. 2017. 487. る 484. …. 17. 10. 3 2013. 10 485. 473. 486 487. 38 482. 484 116. DOI:10.6814/THE.NCCU.LAWID.001.2018.F10.