论商业秘密的不可避免披露原则

发布时间：2018-01-26 05:56

本文关键词： 潜在侵占竞业禁止不可避免披露原则商业秘密权择业自由权　出处：《上海交通大学》2013年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：对商业秘密的潜在侵占通常发生在雇佣关系终止之后，此时知悉原雇主商业秘密的离职雇员若到原雇主的竞争对手处工作将会对原雇主的商业秘密构成潜在的威胁，因为离职雇员在履行新职务的过程中将极有可能侵害原雇主的商业秘密。实践中对潜在侵占的防止可以通过雇佣关系中的竞业禁止协议来实现，也可以通过不可避免披露原则来实现。不可避免披露原则是从美国商业秘密保护的判例法中发展出来的一种禁令救济原则，，该原则几乎同美国商业秘密法律保护制度同时产生。不可避免披露原则在早期发展阶段常常同竞业禁止协议的适用相联系，因而一直没有引起人们的注意，直到第七巡回法院的PepsiCo案之后才受到普遍关注。在PepsiCo案之后涉及不可避免披露原则的案例在美国日见增多，但是美国各州法院对该原则的态度却各不相同，有承认的、有拒绝的、也有承认但严格适用的、还有先承认后又拒绝的，这是因为不可避免披露原则的适用涉及雇主商业秘密权与离职雇员择业自由权的冲突。法院在适用该原则时必须对这两个冲突的利益予以权衡，决定取舍。法院对这一利益冲突采取的政策立场不同，则对该原则的态度也就不同。PepsiCo案作为美国当代商业秘密法中适用不可避免披露原则的典型案例，其意义在于构建了不可避免披露原则适用的基本框架，给出了适用不可避免披露原则时应考虑的要素。其中有些要素是适用不可避免披露原则必须具备的，而有些要素虽不是必须具备的，但是可以作为论证适用不可避免披露原则的理由。不可避免披露原则的出现是商业秘密本质特征的要求，是美国商业秘密保护理论和立法不断发展的必然产物，是同商业秘密范围的不断扩大和对商业秘密保护力度的日益增强相适应的。我国商业秘密保护的立法虽在不断的完善中，但是在防止商业秘密潜在侵占方面却没有明确的规定。我国《劳动合同法》所建立的竞业禁止制度，虽然其目的在于防止对商业秘密的潜在侵占，但是在我国的具体国情下，法院对其适用的结果没有体现出对雇主商业秘密权和离职雇员择业自由权的平衡，更多的是对离职雇员择业自由权的限制。因此为了完善我国的商业秘密保护制度，建议法院在司法实践中借鉴美国的不可避免披露原则，在涉及商业秘密的潜在侵占的案件中，当雇佣关系中存在竞业禁止协议时，以不可避免披露原则来审查竞业禁止协议是否可以执行，当雇佣关系中缺少竞业禁止协议时，可直接以不可避免披露原则来禁止离职雇员到新雇主处就职。在对不可避免披露原则予以适用时要考察原雇主有没有商业秘密、离职雇员是否知悉商业秘密、新旧雇主之间是否有竞争关系、离职雇员的新旧工作有没有相似性等规定性要素及离职雇员和新雇主的主观态度等非规定性要素。
[Abstract]:The potential encroachment on trade secrets usually occurs after the termination of the employment relationship. A former employee who is aware of the former employer's trade secrets will pose a potential threat to the former employer's trade secrets if he works with the former employer's competitors. In practice, the prevention of potential encroachment can be achieved through the non-competition agreement in the employment relationship. It can also be realized by the principle of inevitable disclosure, which is a kind of injunction relief principle developed from the case law of the protection of trade secrets in the United States. This principle almost comes into being at the same time with the legal protection system of American trade secret. The principle of inevitable disclosure is often associated with the application of non-compete agreement in the early stage of development, so it has not attracted people's attention. It wasn't until after the PepsiCo case in the 7th Circuit that there was a growing number of cases involving the principle of inevitable disclosure after the PepsiCo case. However, the attitude of the American state courts to this principle is different, there are some to admit, some to refuse, some to recognize but to apply strictly, and some to recognize and then to reject. This is because the application of the principle of inevitable disclosure involves the conflict between the right of the employer to trade secrets and the right of a former employee to choose a career. The court must weigh the interests of the two conflicts when applying the principle. Decisions on trade-offs. The Court's policy position on this conflict of interest is different. Then the attitude to this principle is also different. PepsiCo case as a typical case of the application of the principle of inevitable disclosure in the contemporary American trade secrets law. Its significance lies in the construction of the basic framework for the application of the unavoidable disclosure principle and the elements to be considered in the application of the unavoidable disclosure principle, some of which must be possessed by the application of the unavoidable disclosure principle. Although some elements are not necessary, they can be used as the reason to demonstrate the application of the principle of inevitable disclosure. The emergence of the principle of inevitable disclosure is the requirement of the essential characteristics of trade secrets. It is the inevitable outcome of the continuous development of the trade secret protection theory and legislation in the United States. It is adapted to the expanding scope of trade secret and the increasing strength of trade secret protection. Although the legislation on the protection of trade secrets in our country is constantly improving, there is no clear stipulation in preventing the potential encroachment of trade secrets. The prohibition system of non-competition established in the Labor contract Law of our country. Although its purpose is to prevent the potential encroachment on the trade secret, but under the concrete situation of our country, the result of the court's application to it does not reflect the balance between the employer's right to trade secret and the right to choose a job for the former employee. Therefore, in order to perfect our country's trade secret protection system, it is suggested that the court should draw lessons from the inevitable disclosure principle of the United States in judicial practice. In cases involving potential encroachment of trade secrets, when there is a non-compete agreement in the employment relationship, the principle of inevitable disclosure is used to examine whether the non-compete agreement can be enforced. When there is no non-compete agreement in the employment relationship. The principle of inevitable disclosure can be directly used to prohibit a former employee from taking up employment with a new employer. When the principle of inevitable disclosure is applied, it is necessary to examine whether the former employer has any trade secrets and whether the former employee knows the trade secret. Whether there is a competitive relationship between the old and the new employers, whether there are any prescriptive factors such as the similarity between the new and the old jobs of the former employees and the subjective attitude of the former employees and the new employers, etc.
【学位授予单位】：上海交通大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D922.294

【参考文献】