美国商业秘密潜在侵占的救济及对我国的启示

发布时间：2018-06-11 20:31

本文选题：保密协议 + 竞业禁止协议　；参考：《华东政法大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：随着企业竞争的愈演愈烈，员工在获取雇主的商业秘密后创办公司，或为了获取更高的职位或薪水，利用基于现有职位所获得的公司商业秘密，去竞争对手公司谋职的现象也并不罕见。这在商业秘密法律体系中被认为是商业秘密的潜在侵占（Threatened Misappropriation）。目前我国还没有引入潜在侵占的概念，对这种潜在侵占的救济法律制度也并不完善，对商业秘密的保护与促进劳动者流动的公共利益之间出现失衡的现状。越来越多的企业与劳动者签订了保密协议或者竞业禁止协议，但仍不能有效预防商业秘密侵权及损害结果的发生。在美国，保密协议已经在客观上演变成为绝大多数雇佣合同或者员工手册的当然组成部分；普通法也已经在雇主和雇员之间设定了保密义务，但竞争压力也很可能使雇员被迫泄露，在经济利益、竞争压力和违约责任之间，雇员的选择难以确定，不可避免泄露情形经常出现，商业秘密的潜在侵占不能被有效地控制。美国的法律制度非常重视员工的流动率以及因此而产生的社会效应，因此，虽然竞业禁止合同是预防潜在侵占的有效方式，但很多州及州法院都并不支持竞业禁止合同的存在。不可避免泄露规则是美国纽约州法院于1919年在审理Eastman Kodak Co.诉Power Film Products, Inc.一案时所确立的，目的是为了保护雇主的商业秘密，防止商业秘密的潜在侵占。由于判例和其他法律均没有给出相关的解释，，在美国，“潜在侵占”这个法律术语的含义也十分模糊。与实质性侵权不同的是，潜在侵占只是存在侵权的高度可能性，而并没有产生实际的损害结果，因此，商业秘密权利人不能向法院主张损害赔偿金，而只能通过申请禁令的方式来防止侵权行为的发生。我国的市场环境、商业模式以及与商业秘密保护的相关法律制度和美国都存在着较大的差异。因此，在适用该规则时，则必须在分析我国市场主体之间的利益关系以及相关的社会政策基础上，选择性地适用该规则，从而促进市场经济的健康发展。本篇论文主要包括六个部分，第一部分，阐述笔者想要解决的问题；第二三部分，对“潜在侵占”以及“不可避免泄露规则”进行分析，确定其在商业秘密保护以及相关的利益平衡机制中的功能定位；第四部分将竞业禁止，一种事前的禁止和不可避免泄露规则，一种事后的禁止这两种制度进行比较，得出这两项制度在商业秘密保护中应当相辅相成的结论；第五六部分，在对我国的商业秘密保护现状进行分析的基础上，提出相应的建议。最后为结语。旨在通过对美国相关制度的研究，为完善我国商业秘密的保护及相关利益平衡机制提供相应建议。
[Abstract]:As competition intensifies, employees start a company after acquiring their employer's trade secrets, or, in order to get a higher position or salary, take advantage of a company's trade secret based on an existing position. It is not uncommon to find a job at a rival company. This is considered a potential encroachment on trade secrets in the trade secrets legal system. At present, China has not introduced the concept of potential usurpation, the relief legal system of this potential encroachment is not perfect, and there is imbalance between the protection of trade secrets and the promotion of the public interests of workers' flow. More and more enterprises have entered into confidentiality agreements or non-compete agreements with workers, but still cannot effectively prevent the infringement of trade secrets and the occurrence of damage. Confidentiality agreements have objectively evolved into an integral part of the vast majority of employment contracts or employee manuals; the common law has also imposed confidentiality obligations between employers and employees, but competition pressures are likely to force employees to leak them. Between economic interests, competitive pressure and liability for breach of contract, the choice of employees is difficult to determine, the inevitable leakage often occurs, and the potential encroachment of trade secrets cannot be effectively controlled. The legal system in the United States attaches great importance to employee turnover and the resulting social effects. Therefore, although non-competitive contracts are an effective way to prevent potential encroachment, But many state and state courts do not support the existence of non-compete contracts. The inevitable breach of the rule is that the New York State court in 1919 tried Eastman Kodak Coak. V. Power Film products, Inc. The purpose of the case was to protect the employer's trade secrets from potential encroachment. In the United States, the legal term "potential encroachment" is also vague, as there is no relevant interpretation in jurisprudence or other laws. Different from the substantive infringement, the potential encroachment is only a high possibility of infringement and does not produce the actual damage result. Therefore, the owner of the trade secret right can not claim damages to the court. But only by applying for injunction to prevent the occurrence of infringement. There are great differences between China's market environment, business model and related legal system of trade secret protection and the United States. Therefore, in applying this rule, the rules must be applied selectively on the basis of the analysis of the interests between the market players in our country and the relevant social policies. So as to promote the healthy development of the market economy. This paper mainly includes six parts, the first part, the author wants to solve the problem, the second part, the third part, the "potential encroachment" and "inevitable leakage rules" analysis, Determine its function in the protection of trade secrets and the relevant interest balance mechanism. The fourth part compares the two systems: the prohibition of non-competition, the prior prohibition and the inevitable disclosure, and the prohibition after the event. The conclusion is that the two systems should complement each other in the protection of trade secrets. Part five, on the basis of analyzing the present situation of the protection of trade secrets in our country, puts forward some corresponding suggestions. The last is the conclusion. The purpose of this paper is to provide some suggestions for the perfection of the protection of trade secrets and the balancing mechanism of relevant interests in China through the study of the relevant systems in the United States.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D922.294

【参考文献】