Intellectual property is considered to be the creations of the human mind and is often intangible. However, in some cases, it can be materialized in the form of artwork or literature. Intellectual property often comes in various forms that include trade secrets, design rights, trademarks, and copyright patents. Intellectual property protection aims at protecting the ideas and creations of business owners and entrepreneurs from unfair competition. There are situations like the one in the case study that results in intellectual property issue.
Intellectual Property Issue
An analysis of the case study indicates that there is an intellectual property issue, more specifically trade secrets. A trade secret is a process, formula, device, and other business information that organizations keep private with the aim of giving them an advantage over the competitors ( Oughton, 2015) . In the case study, the list of clients that Sam took from ABC Paper Corp is the trade secret. The list of customers that he downloaded is considered to be knowledge-based resources that are included in the intellectual property. More specifically, this case shows the infringement of the Non-Disclosure Agreement of NDA when Sam downloaded and tried to provide the customer list that the company put him in charge of. He breached the NDA contract that expected him as the employee to protect the confidentiality of a secret that has been disclosed to him during his employment, which in this case is the customer list.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Sam’s Action
An action is considered to be ethical if it is acceptable by the society. In this case, Sam’s actions are considered to be ethical or not depending on if it is acceptable in the business community. Sam’s action is not ethical because by giving the customers list to XYZ Paper Company, he broke the moral code. Evidently, the client list was created because of the fact that he worked at ABC Paper Corp and the clients may not even have conducted business with him if he was not employed at the company.
Type of Tort Committed
A tort is usually a wrongful act that does not include a breach of trust or contract. Tort results in the injury to another individual’s reputation and property and the injured party is often entitled to compensation ( Cooke, 2005) . Tort law covers many of the civil lawsuits. It means that most of the claims that arise in civil court, except contractual disputes, are under the tort law. The concept, in this case, is to redress the wrong that is done to an individual and also provide relief of others from the wrongful acts by providing compensation in the form of monetary damages. Tort is mainly about the legal duties of the non-injured that is owed to others and the kind of remedial obligations that a person incurs for failing to act according to the duties.
There are various forms of tort such as intentional torts which are the harms that are done to people intentionally through the willful misconduct of the other person such as theft, fraud, and assault. Other forms of intentional tort include interfering with business relations, intentionally inflicting mental distress, fraud, conversion, defamation, invasion of privacy, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution. From the various kinds of torts that are available, Sam is guilty of several that include intentional infliction of mental distress to the managers of ABC Paper Corp, conversion, and interference with the business relations. No other party in the case scenario has committed a tort .
Criminal Liability
The court has granted a remedy that needs the party to refrain from performing or act in a certain way . Equitable relief is often provided in civil claims that involve contract or torts disputed. The most common form of equitable relief are the injunctions which are primarily found in torts claims and are a specific performance which is found in contract disputes. Examples of equitable relief that are found in tort cases include gag orders that aim at preventing people from publishing information that can be considered to be sensitive. In the case of Sam, his actions subject him to criminal liability because of various reasons ( Helewitz, 2010) . The first reason is the fact that there are strict laws that state that the misappropriation or theft of trade secret such as the theft of client lists by Sam is a crime. The other reason is the fact that Sam disobeyed the non-disclosure agreement that he signed with the company. He is at the risk of being prosecuted in the court of law and prosecuted depending on the jury’s determination on the extent to which the information is known by persons who are outside ABC Paper Co.
Moreover, the court will also determine the extent to which the employees of the other company know about the client list and if there are any mitigation measures were taken by ABC Paper Co so as to protect the confidential information. In addition, the court will determine the value of the client list that was downloaded to the survival of ABC Paper Co and its importance to the rival company. In addition, the determination of the case by the jury will depend on how simple of the ease of the information being stolen and circulated to other businesses. However, depending on the fact that Sam was in charge of the list means that it was not easy to access it. In addition, his action after being found by Natalie and considering the fact that providing the list was a condition to join XYZ Paper Co means that the list was important. Therefore, the jury is likely to find Sam criminally liable.
Conclusion
Generally, the case of Sam provides a sample situation on how the misappropriation of trade secrets can result in a certain form of tort, which in this case is a trade secret , and which is punishable by the law. The act of downloading and stealing the client list from ABC can lead to criminal prosecution because it is against the laws on the theft of trade secrets. In addition, he is criminally liable for going against the non-disclosure agreement that he had signed with the company. Finally, Sam is liable for tort because of the fact that he led to Natalie’s injury when he shoved her aside as she tried to stop him from stealing the company’s information.
References
Cooke, P. (2005). Law of tort . Harlow: Pearson Longman.
Helewitz, J. A. (2010). Basic contract law for paralegals . Austin [Tex.: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
Oughton, D. W., & Harvey, B. (2015). Law of torts: 2015 and 2016 . Oxford : Oxford University Press .
