Waymo settled its trade secret case with Uber during the trial. Uber gave 0.34% in equity to Waymo. If Uber is valued at $72B, the settlement is worth $245M.
Copyright © 2018 Robert Moll. All rights reserved.
Showing posts with label trade secret. Show all posts
Showing posts with label trade secret. Show all posts
Friday, February 9, 2018
Tuesday, May 17, 2016
Congress - Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA)
Trade secret is now governed by Federal law rather than state law. This is a major shift in trade secret law. Further, compared to changes we have seen in U.S. patent law, the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA), signed by President Obama on May 12, 2016, passed with little controversy.
See Professor Dennis Crouch's [Updated] Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016: Markup and Commentary for a marked up version and series of articles on DTSA.
Copyright © 2016 Robert Moll. All rights reserved.
See Professor Dennis Crouch's [Updated] Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016: Markup and Commentary for a marked up version and series of articles on DTSA.
Copyright © 2016 Robert Moll. All rights reserved.
Thursday, December 10, 2015
UC Berkeley - Intellectual Property Protection for Computer Programs
The Berkeley Center for Law & Technology (BCLT) in conjunction with the Berkeley Technology Law Journal (BTLJ) is hosting a symposium on legal protection of computer software on April 14-15, 2016.
It will be held at the Chevron Auditorium, International House at UC Berkeley. Registration opens January 2016. Full agenda, with speakers.
As announced by BCLT: "In the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice v. CLS Bank and its denial of Google’s petition for certiorari in the Oracle software copyright case, new uncertainties exist about the roles that patent, copyright, and other forms of IP are and should be playing in the legal protection of computer software.
It will bring together leading scholars in both law and economics, industry representatives, and practicing lawyers who will consider what the courts are getting right and wrong and how intellectual property law ought to evolve to do a better job for the industry and the public that so depends on software these days. The symposium will include sessions on the roles of patents, copyrights and trade secrecy. Also featured will be empirical research on the state of the software industry and on the evolving strategies on which software developers rely to protect their innovations."
Copyright © 2015 Robert Moll. All rights reserved.
It will be held at the Chevron Auditorium, International House at UC Berkeley. Registration opens January 2016. Full agenda, with speakers.
As announced by BCLT: "In the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice v. CLS Bank and its denial of Google’s petition for certiorari in the Oracle software copyright case, new uncertainties exist about the roles that patent, copyright, and other forms of IP are and should be playing in the legal protection of computer software.
It will bring together leading scholars in both law and economics, industry representatives, and practicing lawyers who will consider what the courts are getting right and wrong and how intellectual property law ought to evolve to do a better job for the industry and the public that so depends on software these days. The symposium will include sessions on the roles of patents, copyrights and trade secrecy. Also featured will be empirical research on the state of the software industry and on the evolving strategies on which software developers rely to protect their innovations."
Copyright © 2015 Robert Moll. All rights reserved.
Monday, November 2, 2015
Techcrunch - Jawbone Files Countersuit Against Fitbit - Patent & Trade Secret Litigation
Techcrunch reports on the Jawbone v. Fitbit trade secret and patent litigation. See Jawbone Files Countersuit Against Fitbit In "Frivolous" Patent Infringement Case.
Copyright © 2015 Robert Moll. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2015 Robert Moll. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, September 4, 2013
USPTO - IP Awareness Assessment
If you are interested in knowing more about IP without receiving a legal bill from your attorney, you may want to check out this new feature on the USPTO web site. The USPTO and the National Institute of Standards and Technology Manufacturing Extension Partnership developed an online IP Awareness Assessment which covers IP strategies, best practices, international IP rights, IP asset tracking, licensing technology to others, and using technology of others. It covers five categories of IP: copyright, design patents, trademarks, trade secrets, and utility patents. The assessment is free and takes 10-30 minutes.
Copyright © 2013 Robert Moll. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2013 Robert Moll. All rights reserved.
Friday, February 24, 2012
Fired CEO Claims Benchmark Stole His Ideas
Here's a cautionary tale if you are seeking VC funding for your startup: Fatdoor Founder Sues Benchmark Capital, Saying It Stole His Idea for Nextdoor.
The startup (Fatdoor) had plans to be the "Facebook" of local neighborhoods, had filed many patents applications, had thousands of viewers, an experienced entrepreneur as the CEO, had allegedly impressed Benchmark only to see it then pass on funding ... and fund another startup (Nextdoor) six months later on the "same idea." Because Benchmark signed no NDA, and the CEO's applications were assigned to the startup and later sold to Google, the fired CEO was reduced to filing a trade secret, interference, and fraud lawsuit. I read the complaint and it sounds like this will be a difficult case. Because you won't find many VCs willing to sign NDAs, and assignment of your patents and applications to the startup, only raises the defense of assignor estoppel if you leave the place, contracts and patents cannot protect against investors from "taking your idea." For one, it will be difficult to define what is your idea. Surely, the companies have differences. So how does one protect self-interest? If you are going to spend the time and effort that this CEO allegedly put into the venture, you need to be well advised and have a corporate structure that allows you to retain management and voting control while satisfying the VCs interest.
Thanks to Suzie Lipton-Moll on this article!
Copyright © 2012 Robert Moll. All rights reserved.
The startup (Fatdoor) had plans to be the "Facebook" of local neighborhoods, had filed many patents applications, had thousands of viewers, an experienced entrepreneur as the CEO, had allegedly impressed Benchmark only to see it then pass on funding ... and fund another startup (Nextdoor) six months later on the "same idea." Because Benchmark signed no NDA, and the CEO's applications were assigned to the startup and later sold to Google, the fired CEO was reduced to filing a trade secret, interference, and fraud lawsuit. I read the complaint and it sounds like this will be a difficult case. Because you won't find many VCs willing to sign NDAs, and assignment of your patents and applications to the startup, only raises the defense of assignor estoppel if you leave the place, contracts and patents cannot protect against investors from "taking your idea." For one, it will be difficult to define what is your idea. Surely, the companies have differences. So how does one protect self-interest? If you are going to spend the time and effort that this CEO allegedly put into the venture, you need to be well advised and have a corporate structure that allows you to retain management and voting control while satisfying the VCs interest.
Thanks to Suzie Lipton-Moll on this article!
Copyright © 2012 Robert Moll. All rights reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)