Join us for a cross-disciplinary discussion between our NA trade secrets partners on trade secrets enforcement issues that arise in export controls. As part of the heightened enforcement of trade secrets theft allegations in the United States, the Commerce Department recently added several institutions and individuals to the Entity List based on alleged theft. The spotlight on trade secrets is a trend to watch, and our experts walk you through what you need to know to manage your supply chains.
The US Government is increasing its use of a powerful tool under US export controls -- the Entity List -- to penalize parties accused of engaging in trade secret theft against US companies.
Intellectual property, trade secrets, and other information and data transfers can be considered exports -- if they involve controlled technology --- therefore, subjecting certain exports of IP and trade secrets to US export controls.
As the US Government increases its trade secrets enforcement efforts including through the ongoing "China Initiative" focusing on criminal prosecutions of trade secrets theft and economic espionage with a nexus to China, the executive branch has also focused on enforcement through more creative actions, as seen in a December 2020 round of designations to the Entity List.
Given this precedent, non-US companies that rely on US products or technology in their supply chain should consider the risk of Entity-List designation should they become subject to a US criminal trade secrets investigation. This is especially true if a company is doing business with Chinese joint venture partners or on-boarding or off-boarding employees with access to key IP in its China operations.
Speakers: Bradford Newman, Alexandre Lamy, Jessica Nall, Christine Streatfeild
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 4 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)
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 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 © 2023 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.
Are you sure want to delete comment ?
Scan this QR Code to share this content