TraverseInternet Law Federal Court Report: February 2011 - Trade Secret Violation Lawsuits

Traverse Internet Law Disclaimer

The facts are unproven allegations of the Plaintiff and all commentary is based upon the allegations, the truthfulness and accuracy of which are likely in dispute.

VILLAZZO, LLC v. SERENDIPITY VILLA LIMITED, ET AL.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA (MIAMI)
1:11-CV-20201
FILED: 1/19/2011

Consultants have a tendency to acquire information and then use it to sell to other businesses in the industry. Make sure that you have specific non-compete or exclusionary provisions in your web development and consulting contracts to avoid this type of problem from arising.
Plaintiff Villazzo offers luxury homes and hospitality services to high net worth individuals in exclusive locations throughout the world. Defendant Morali was contracted as a consultant to Villazzo and acquired certain confidential and proprietary information in the furtherance of his duties and responsibilities. Defendant Morali was providing consulting service to a competitor of Villazzo without Villazzo’s knowledge and is alleged to have an acquired extensive client lists and related information and provided that for the competitor.

Counts in the lawsuit include copyright infringement, unfair competition, violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, tortious interference with business relationships, and misappropriation of trade secrets. Plaintiff requests that the Court enter preliminary and permanent injunctive relief along with an accounting of Defendant’s profits, actual damages, payment of royalties to Plaintiff by Defendant for misappropriation of the Plaintiff’s intellectual property and trade secrets, statutory damages, costs and attorneys’ fees. Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1469.

Traverse Internet Law Federal Court Report: December, 2010 - Trade Secret Violation Lawsuits

Traverse Internet Law Disclaimer

The facts are unproven allegations of the Plaintiff and all commentary is based upon the allegations, the truthfulness and accuracy of which are likely in dispute.


ART OF LIVING FOUNDATION v. DOES 1-10
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (OAKLAND)
4:10-CV-05022
FILED: 11/9/2010

Using trade secret information of a previous employer is a growing problem because most employees do not understand what information is, or is not, trade secret information. It is not absolutely necessary that the information have the words “trade secret” written on the documentation. And there are ongoing debates between attorneys as to what is a trade secret. Be very careful with information that you acquire that could be seen as being of a confidential nature. And if you have an employee who leaves with confidential information it is worthwhile to have your attorney evaluate the nature of the information if it is important to you.

The Plaintiff is an international and humanitarian organization based in Bangalore, India. Former student-teachers have published alleged trade secret information on the web including training guides, continuation manuals, and teacher notes that are allegedly trade secret information of the Plaintiff.

Plaintiff alleges copyright infringement, vicarious copyright infringement, contributory copyright infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets, defamation, and trade libel. Plaintiff requests preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, actual damages, treble damages, compensatory damages, costs and attorneys’ fees. Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1458.

Traverse Internet Law Federal Court Report: November, 2010 - Trade Secret Violation Lawsuits

Traverse Internet Law Disclaimer

The facts are unproven allegations of the Plaintiff and all commentary is based upon the allegations, the truthfulness and accuracy of which are likely in dispute.


ECARLIST, LLC v. MY DEALER BIZ LLC, ET AL.
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (DALLAS)
3:10-CV-02045
FILED: 10/8/2010

Trade secrets are another type of intellectual property that can be misappropriated. As a business owner you would be well advised to identify your trade secrets within your business and protect them vigorously because shielding your trade secrets from competitors may be the only way to protect your strategic advantage in the marketplace.

Plaintiff provides Internet-related service such as inventory management, vehicle inventory listing management, digital paperwork, vehicle pricing analytics, and website design to automobile dealerships. Defendants are competitors. Defendants are alleged to have gained access to Plaintiff’s trade secrets including its software layouts and methodology used to create its applications and, using those trade secrets, developed a “knock-off” of Plaintiff’s software to sell to the automotive industry.

Defendants are charged with trade secret misappropriation, violation of Texas Penal Code Chapter 33:02, trade dress infringement, business disparagement, unfair competition, and conspiracy. Plaintiff requests that the Court enter in a judgment granting maximum statutory damages, actual damages, exemplary damages, and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1448.