Brief Amici Curiae of Fifteen Professors of Intellectual Property Law in Carnegie Mellon Univ. v. Marvell Tech. Grp., Ltd., No. 14-1492 (Fed. Cir.)

Theories of intellectual property take the individual inventor or the firm as the unit of innovation. But studies in economic sociology show that in complex fields where knowledge is rapidly advancing and widely dispersed among different firms, the locus of innovation is neither an individual nor a single firm. Rather, innovative ideas originate in the informal networks of learning and collaboration that cut across firms. Understanding innovation in this subset of industries as emerging out of networks of informal information-sharing across firms challenges traditional utilitarian theories of trade secret law-which assume trade secret protection is needed to prevent excessive private, self-help efforts to preserve secrecy. Doctrinally, knowledge network research suggests that the scope of trade secret protection in these industries should be narrow. In these industries, strong trade secret rights that grant managers tight control over employee-inventors' informal information-sharing practices are bad innovation policy. Rather, optimizing trade secret law requires tailoring the strength of protection to match industry characteristics, narrowing trade secret scope in those industries where informal information-sharing networks are predicted to enhance innovative output. In turn, because industry types tend to cluster around geographic centers, the importance of tailoring cautions against current trends towards uniformity by federalizing trade secret law and favors state experimentalism in designing trade secret law and policy.

show abstract

Can a Court Change the Law by Saying Nothing?

Gugliuzza

Lemley

2017

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

Brief Amici Curiae of Fifteen Professors of Intellectual Property Law in Carnegie Mellon Univ. v. Marvell Tech. Grp., Ltd., No. 14-1492 (Fed. Cir.)

Cited by 5 publications

References 4 publications

(Un)Reasonable Royalties

(Un)Reasonable Royalties

Spill Your (Trade) Secrets: Knowledge Networks as Innovation Drivers

Can a Court Change the Law by Saying Nothing?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About