The world of intellectual property and protection of rights often requires complex filings with governmental offices and high costs are to be attached with the process. The world of the internet has meant that a product launched, quickly catches on and can be easily copied and done at a fast rate. Trade Secrets are offered great protection and do not have an expiration date. Trade secrets depend on whether reasonable measures have been made to keep the information a secret and if economic value is able to be derived. It extends to include financial, business, scientific, technical, economic, or engineering information. This can consist of patterns, plans, compilations, program devices, formulas, designs, prototypes, methods, techniques, processes, procedures, programs, or codes, whether tangible or intangible.
Normally you can look up a good recipe or ask a friend for some cooking tips. However, not all recipes can be so easily shared. Recipes used for cooking purposes can also be confidential information, in terms of a secret formula for people when it becomes a form of profit! A recent case involved the production of jam and a recipe violation which came at a high price. The case involved two different fig spreads where one company, Dalmatia, had a recipe protected by trade secrets. It utilized another company, Foodmatch, for its distribution and manufacturing. Unhappy with the quality of product that was being produced, they decided to engage in the services of someone else. Shortly thereafter, Foodmatch came out with a fig spread of its own by the name of Divinia. Of course, a court battle had to ensue. The facts of the case highlight the issues involved with disclosing trade secrets to vendors or distributors. Dalmatia argued that these actions were in violation of the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016. It was the seller of the leading fig jam in the USA, it had every desire to want to fight for their rights. In the first of its kind, and under the new law and before a jury, this case was going to test waters.
The battle, which took over more than a year, concerned violations of Trade Secret law on a federal and state level, trademark infringement and unfair competition. One factor that came under scrutiny was the established reputation of its customers for high-quality, specialty products. In the offering of a “counterfeit” product, it was considerable damage to their brand name and the undermining of consumer confidence in the quality of their product. Based on the verdict, it appears that the jury believed this to be the case and was sold on their marketing. For a period of more than a fortnight, a verdict of $2,500,000 in damages and $500,000 was the trade secret misappropriation claim. The matter may be appealed but can show that recipes can come at a high price and can be protected. Going forward, litigants would be well-advised to be cautious about potential substantive differences between state claims of misappropriation and federal claims.
Our Aurora non-compete agreement attorneys have defended high-level executives in a covenant not to compete and trade secret lawsuits. A case in which our firm defended a former Motorola executive was covered in Crain’s Chicago Business. You can view that article by clicking here.
DiTommaso Lubin Austermuehle a firm of Chicago business dispute lawyers handles litigation over non-compete clauses for individuals and businesses of all sizes, including small or closely held businesses for whom competition from an ex-employee can be a serious threat. Our Chicago business lawyers with offices near Kenilworth and Winnetka have substantial experience in restrictive covenant and breach of contract cases, and we are proud of our record of strong results. We have successfully represented a number of doctors in non-compete, partnership, and other business disputes. We understand the complexities of physician partnership and non-compete agreements.
DiTommaso Lubin Austermuehle a Chicago business litigation law firm represents both plaintiffs and defendants in such cases, and can also help stop litigation before it starts by reviewing contracts to look for covenants and clauses that could create problems later. Our firm has also handled many shareholders and LLC disputes between owners of closely held corporations, and LLCs.
Based in Oakbrook Terrace and downtown Chicago, our Barrington and Deerfield non-compete agreement and business dispute lawyers take cases from Winnetka and Lake Bluff and many other cities throughout Illinois, as well as in Indiana, Wisconsin and the entire United States. To learn more or set up a free consultation, please contact one of our Chicago business dispute lawyers through the Internet or call toll-free at 1-877-990-4990 today.
DiTommaso Lubin Austermuehle’s Oak Brook and Schaumburg non-compete agreement litigation attorneys have more than three decades of experience helping clients unravel the complexities of Illinois and out-of-state non-compete and trade secret theft laws. Our Chicago business dispute attorneys also represent individuals, family businesses and enterprises of all sizes in a variety of legal disputes, including disputes among partners, shareholders, and LLC members as well as lawsuits between businesses and consumer rights, auto fraud, and wage claim individual and class action cases. In every case, our goal is to resolve disputes as quickly and successfully as possible, helping business clients protect their investments and get back to business as usual. From offices in Oak Brook, near Barrington and Lake Forest, we serve clients throughout Illinois and the Midwest.