North America: Does inclusion of 'ideas' and 'know how' in Confidential Information and Invention Assignment Agreements constitute an unenforceable non-compete under California law? (Video Chat)

In brief

The North America Trade Secrets Practice discusses a novel argument asserted by two defendants in an ongoing trade secret misappropriation case filed by Cisco in California federal court that has the potential to impact almost every company's Confidential Information and Invention Assignment Agreements, both in California and beyond.


Contents

Bradford Newman and Anne Kelts Assayag discuss the former employees assertion that by classifying their 'know-how,' 'ideas,' and any information concerning Cisco's 'actual or anticipated business' as 'proprietary,' Cisco is attempting to achieve by contract what the law specifically disallows. "Cisco cannot claim 'ownership' over [their] know-how and ideas and then assert that alleged ownership to prevent [these employees] from working" for a competitor.

So is this argument too esoteric to be of concern, or something that companies need to understand and address?   Is  this attack on standard Confidential Information Agreement provisions limited only to California, or does it have the potential to spread to other jurisdiction?  Our North America Trade Secrets Practice members provides insight on these and related issues.

Click here to access Focus on Trade Secrets.

Related video chats

Episode 1 United States: Using Ex Parte Seizure Orders to Protect your Trade Secrets (Video Chat)

Episode 2 United States: Employee Non-Solicitation Clauses in California - Quickly Clearing up the Confusion (Video Chat) 

Episode 3 North America: DOJ's China Initiative - Insights on Trade Secrets Criminal Liability (Video Chat)

Episode 5 United States: Snap removal in trade secret cases (Video Chat)

Episode 6 United States: Key considerations in parallel criminal and civil trade secrets cases (Video Chat) 

Episode 7 North America: Discovery in Trade Secrets cases (Video Chat)

Episode 8 United States: Avoiding the Entity List - Rise of trade secrets enforcement risk through US export controls (Video Chat)

Episode 9 North America: When to patent and when to maintain as trade secret (Video Chat)

Episode 10 United States: Discovery in trade secrets cases - Part II (Video Chat)

Episode 11 United States: The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act Post-Van Buren (Video Chat)

Episode 12 United States: Protecting Trade Secrets in an Era of Pro-Competitive Government Enforcement (Video Chat)

Episode 13 North America: When Trade Secrets Thieves Are Whistleblowers (Video Chat)

Episode 14 North America: Trade Secrets in Tech Transactions (Video Chat)


Copyright © 2022 Baker & McKenzie. All rights reserved. Ownership: This documentation and content (Content) is a proprietary resource owned exclusively by Baker McKenzie (meaning Baker & McKenzie International and its member firms). The Content is protected under international copyright conventions. Use of this Content does not of itself create a contractual relationship, nor any attorney/client relationship, between Baker McKenzie and any person. Non-reliance and exclusion: All Content is for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal and regulatory developments. All summaries of the laws, regulations and practice are subject to change. The Content is not offered as legal or professional advice for any specific matter. It is not intended to be a substitute for reference to (and compliance with) the detailed provisions of applicable laws, rules, regulations or forms. Legal advice should always be sought before taking any action or refraining from taking any action based on any Content. Baker McKenzie and the editors and the contributing authors do not guarantee the accuracy of the Content and expressly disclaim any and all liability to any person in respect of the consequences of anything done or permitted to be done or omitted to be done wholly or partly in reliance upon the whole or any part of the Content. The Content may contain links to external websites and external websites may link to the Content. Baker McKenzie is not responsible for the content or operation of any such external sites and disclaims all liability, howsoever occurring, in respect of the content or operation of any such external websites. Attorney Advertising: This Content may qualify as “Attorney Advertising” requiring notice in some jurisdictions. To the extent that this Content may qualify as Attorney Advertising, PRIOR RESULTS DO NOT GUARANTEE A SIMILAR OUTCOME. Reproduction: Reproduction of reasonable portions of the Content is permitted provided that (i) such reproductions are made available free of charge and for non-commercial purposes, (ii) such reproductions are properly attributed to Baker McKenzie, (iii) the portion of the Content being reproduced is not altered or made available in a manner that modifies the Content or presents the Content being reproduced in a false light and (iv) notice is made to the disclaimers included on the Content. The permission to re-copy does not allow for incorporation of any substantial portion of the Content in any work or publication, whether in hard copy, electronic or any other form or for commercial purposes.