Protection of trade secrets
- Filter by
- Categories
- Tags
- Authors
- Show all
- All
- "Slots" Litigation in MD
- Book Reviews
- Commercial Litigation
- ESI
- Important Posts
- News Stories
- Social Media
- Software
- Uncategorized
- All
- Anecdote
- Citations
- Computer Usage Policies
- Conference of Parties
- Cooperation
- Costs
- Data Map
- Discoverability
- Ethics
- Evidence
- Evidence: Authentication
- Forensics
- FRCP 26(g)
- Inherent power
- Litigation Hold: Proportionality
- Litigation Hold: Scope
- Litigation Hold: Trigger
- Mediation
- Privilege
- Rules
- Sanctions
- Search
- Self Preservation
- Slots
- Trade Secrets
August 30, 2021
Published by Michael Berman at August 30, 2021
Categories
Federal Rule of Evidence 502 was passed in 2008 by a unanimous vote in the Senate, overwhelmingly in the House, and signed by President George W. Bush. Anything with that degree of support has to be good and Rule 502 provides substantial and necessary benefits. An excellent publication describes the rule in […]
March 24, 2021
Published by Michael Berman at March 24, 2021
Categories
Misappropriation of trade secrets cases are increasingly digital. For example, a former employer may seek discovery of a new employer’s information. As discussed in “The Gang That Couldn’t Spoliate Straight,” forensic analysis is often necessary. Craig Ball’s post, “What’s in a Name (or Hash Value)?” discussed some forensic options. A recent American […]
March 7, 2021
Published by Michael Berman at March 7, 2021
Categories
Trade secret litigation invariably involves ESI. Craig Ball has written “What’s in a Name (or Hash Value)?,” discussing the use of hash values and file names in tracking down stolen data. In “The Gang That Couldn’t Spoliate Straight,” I discussed an order that the alleged wrongdoer preserve ESI and the potential issues […]
January 24, 2021
Published by Michael Berman at January 24, 2021
Categories
A few years ago, the Hon. Paul W. Grimm wrote: “At the end of the day, this is the case of the ‘gang that couldn’t spoliate straight.’” Victor Stanley, Inc. v. Creative Pipe, Inc., 269 F.R.D. 497, 501 (D. Md. 2010). That description is equally applicable to the conduct that led to a […]