08232012Here are the noteworthy trade secret, non-compete and cybersecurity stories from the past week, as well one or two that I missed over the past few weeks (better late than never): 

Noteworthy Trade Secret and Non-Compete Posts and Cases: 

  • CBS has dismissed its trade secret and copyright lawsuit against ABC over the “Glass House” reality show. Readers of this blog will recall U.S. District Court Gary Feess denied CBS’ request for a TRO back in June. CBS announced its decision last week and said the lawsuit was no longer necessary because its “Big Brother” show had trumped “Glass House” where it counted, in the battle for ratings.
  • Interested in the dark side of trade secrets? Set your DVR or watch Crime, Inc.’s episode on corporate espionage tonight at 9:00 p.m. on CNBC. (Thanks to Josh Durham for the reminder.)
  • “How to Protect Your IP in China? Don’t Hire Anyone,” recommends Dan Harris in his always-interesting China Law Blog. 
  • Texas federal courts are divided over whether to extend a non-compete’s duration when an employee has violated the non-compete, reports Paul Freehling in Seyfarth Shaw’s Trading Places Blog.
  • For those in Missouri, Robert Milligan has an important post in Seyfarth’s Trading Secrets Blog about the Missouri Supreme Court’s recent opinion reaffirming the enforceability of non-competes in that state. 
  • The U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina has reaffirmed that a compilation of information can qualify as a trade secret, according to Parker Poe’s Trade Secret & Unfair Competition Reporter Blog
  • Burr & Forman’s Non-Compete & Trade Secrets Blog has a nice primer on the Inevitable Disclosure doctrine. 
  • “Trade Secrets: Your Secret Weapon under Patent Reform” argues Nixon Peabody’s R. Mark Halligan and Stout Risius & Ross’ David A. Haas.
  • Kenneth Vanko’s Legal Developments in Non-Competition Agreements Blog has a fine wrap-up of some noteworthy posts and articles. 

Computer Fraud and Abuse Act Posts: 

  • Yet another district court has adopted the reasoning of U.S. v. Nosal and WEC Carolina v. Miller, reports Littler’s Unfair Competition & Trade Secrets Blog. In International Airport Centers, LLC v. Citrin, U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota Patrick Schlitz dismissed the agency’s CFAA claim, reasoning that had Congress “meant to so vastly expand the jurisdiction of the federal courts, Congress would have been much more explicit.” 

Cybersecurity Posts and Articles: 

  • “Are smart buildings the next cyber-threat?” asks TechnoLlama. 
  • “Cybersecurity Is Top of Mind for General Counsel and Co. Directors” writes Molly McDonough for the ABAJournal.
  • “Is An International Cyber Regulatory Agency Needed?” asks Richard Stiener in an article for Forbes.
  • “The Business BYO Craze: Has It Gone Too Far?” asks the HR Bartender Blog.
  • “Are Lawyers Safe Up in the Cloud? asks Martin Scarinci for the Martindale.com Blog

News You Can Use:

  • “Ten Tips and Tricks Every iPhone and iPad User Should Know” offers The Wall Street Journal.