The Importance of Trade Secret Metadata at a Trade Secret Misappropriation Court Case

The Importance of Trade Secret Metadata at a Trade Secret Misappropriation Court Case by David L. CohenContrary to popular belief — especially among business owners — trade secrets are not only found in top secret, highly-secure research labs. Rather, almost every business possesses trade secrets, regardless of whether the business is small, medium or large.

A trade secret is anything that is:

  • Not generally known or readily accessible to the relevant business circles or to the public;
  • Gives some sort of potential or actual economic benefit to its owner where the benefit derives from the fact that the thing is not generally known, and not just from the value of the thing itself; and
  • Is subject to “reasonable steps,” depending on the specific circumstances, to keep it secret.

Historically, trade secrets, if even considered, were treated as an afterthought. If there was some sort of non-disclosure agreement on file somewhere, companies were satisfied and turned their attention to patents, copyrights, and designs.

This attitude is changing for a number of reasons.

Read more

Will the IoT Patent Wars be like the Smartphone Wars? Part 2

Will the IoT Patent Wars be like the Smartphone Wars? Part 2 by David L. CohenIt is worth noting that many of the use cases for IoT that are currently receiving much attention (like connected cars), likely won’t fall into litigation because of SEP enforcement challenges. Frankly, I don’t see a scenario where the number of cars being sold and the proportionate value that IoT will bring to those cars (with the possible exception of self-driving cars) are such that high value licensing will make sense. On a volume basis, a connected car manufacturer like BMW probably sells fewer cars than the smallest smartphone manufacturer and the absolute value of any apportioned royalty base is likely smaller than that of a smartphone. Additionally, it is worth noting that many of the higher value IoT products and services will have wireline connections to the Internet, and wireline has traditionally had a less contentious licenses ecosystem than wireless connections. Read more

Will the IoT Patent Wars be like the Smartphone Wars?

I believe we may be due in the next two to three years for a large-scale re-eruption of the patent wars that have been a constant presence in the telecommunications industry since at least 2005. Unlike the prior iterations of those wars, I believe these wars will not only be international, but much of their driving force will occur ex-USA.  Moreover, they will be across multiple industries. They will be much more impacted by direct government policy and will be much broader in impact than just mobile cell phones and terminals.

I believe that the playing field of this war will be the Internet of Things often abbreviated as IoT. Read more

You’ve Decided to Conduct a Trade Secret Audit. Now What? Part 2

You’ve Decided to Conduct a Trade Secret Audit. Now What? Part 2 by David L. Cohen{5:35 minutes to read}  We all know what a ‘trade secret’ is, but legally speaking let’s be clear. And how about a ‘trade secret audit’? It’s probably safe to say it’s a review of all policies, procedures, and agreements in place surrounding a company’s trade secrets, to ensure they are in accordance with current best practices, in order to legally protect company intellectual property (IP) and assets.

There are five key areas of focus that a company performing a trade-secret audit must consider as they navigate this crucial undertaking. The following article outlines the five areas in full detail. Read more

Secrets to Using Intellectual Property to Increase Startup Value

This article by David L. Cohen, Ivan Chaperot, and Frederic Thiel was originally published by Bloomberg Law. Copyright 2018 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.

Secrets to Using Intellectual Property to Increase Startup Value

David L. Cohen

David L. Cohen, Esq.

David L. Cohen, P.C. – Kidon IP
123 West 93rd Street
New York, NY 10025
(917) 596-1974

You’ve Decided to Conduct a Trade Secret Audit. Now What?

You’ve Decided to Conduct a Trade Secret Audit. Now What? by David L. Cohen{3:10 minutes to read} You decided you need to conduct a trade secret audit. What should you do next?

After getting management buy-in, the most important step is to decide what you hope to achieve with the audit. Broadly speaking, there are five headline goals: Awareness, Agreements, Employees, Tools, and Monetization.

Below are some of the key aspects of the 5 headlines. Read more

Designing and Deploying a Trade Secret Service

David L. Cohen, P.C. is proud to announce its partnering with Chawton Innovation Services to offer trade secret services to both companies and law firms.  For law firms we have jointly developed a white paper on how to design and deploy a trade secret service

Designing and deploying a trade secret service v2DLC

Banana Republic?

A nice summary of the pro-patentee side of the argument.   Michael Shore makes many valid points even if the argument is a bit overwrought.   I believe the weakness of the current patent system is a necessary but by no means sufficient part of the explanation for the economic challenges we are currently facing vis-a-vis big tech.   A large part of the answer has to do with the insular culture created in Silicon valley which disdains or ignores those outside the bubble; the disregard of real engineering in favor of “Software engineering” – i.e., engineering without a public interest concern for safety and consequences; the fetishization of disruption for its own sake; and the absolute triumph of the Chicago school’s approach to anti-trust.  Putting the economy and political economy’s problems on the changes in the patent system alone is not really fair.

As the Autonomous Vehicle turns….

As if the Uber v. Waymo trade secret case couldn’t get any more dramatic.  I wonder how the lawyer was able to tie in all the allegations into what I understand to be essentially an employment dispute.  Could be crazy stuff if even half of what is alleged is true. TechCrunch posted the complaint to Scribd – it is one long stream of consciousness mess.  I am surprised given the potential for a large payout that the lawyer for the nanny couldn’t at least make the story a little more coherent and organized –

The nanny of former Uber engineer Anthony Levandowski has filed an excruciatingly detailed lawsuit

Apple, big crybaby?

So wait, Apple had constructive knowledge of Voip-pal’s lobbying because the lobbying letters were posted on pacer in the litigation docket on May of 2017 – and NOW they are complaining?   Talk about being over-entitled.  It’s bad enough when companies believe that its OK to lobby ex parte to kill patents, but lobbying ex parte to save patents is bad.  But now to complain about the lobbying more than 6 months after that lobbying was publicized in the court docket?  Really?  Is Apple that spoiled? or am I missing something here.