In a Part 1 of this post, I stated that engaging in competitive intelligence is not the same as, or synonymous with, engaging in economic or industrial espionage or the misappropriation of trade secrets.  That is, gathering competitive intelligence should not involve the intentional gathering of competitor’s confidential information or trade secrets.  To the extent that confidential information or trade secrets are obtained, a firm should only utilize such intelligence if they were not obtained by theft, misrepresentation or deception.

I also mentioned that, as a relatively new discipline, there are few standards for competitive intelligence professionals to follow.  Well, here are some “do’s” and don’ts”:

Do’s:

  • Publicly available information may be freely gathered using any channels through which it is offered to the public.
  • Competitive intelligence professionals should examine published information sources, conduct interviews, and use other legal and ethical methods to collect competitive intelligence information, using deductive reasoning to fill in any gaps in such information to create an analysis of a competitor’s product or marketing strategy.
  • Competitive intelligence professionals can contact competitors directly to obtain publicly-available information.
  • Competitive information disclosed to a firm or its agents can be used for the benefit of the firm if the information is not subject to a restriction of confidentiality or is a trade secret.
  • Contractors employed by a firm to collect competitive information must accurately identify themselves, stating their name and the name of their company.  However, unless the firm otherwise agrees, the contractors do not need to identify the firm by name, even if the subject requests the name of the contractor’s client.
  • Competitive intelligence professionals should attempt to make contact at the manager level or above, and should not contact lower level employees of an organization.

Don’ts:

  • Competitive intelligence professionals should never purposefully seek to obtain the trade secrets or non-public/competitively sensitive information of other companies.
  • Competitive intelligence professionals should never attempt to induce a third party to violate their confidentiality obligations to another party.
  • Direct contact with a competitor for the purpose of competitive intelligence activities should be avoided.
  • If a vendor performs work for a competitor, any information obtained as a result of such engagement of the vendor should not be shared with your firm or used by such vendor on your firm’s behalf without authorization from such competitor, except for general “know-how,” skills or industry knowledge.
  • Former employees of a competitor now working for your firm, or current or former employees of a competitor who have a personal relationship with one of your firm’s (or its third-party vendor’s) employees should not be exploited in order to obtain information about the competitor.
  • Employees (current and former) have a duty to their employer not to disclose confidential information or trade secrets they received during their employment.
  • Employees and third party vendors conducting competitive intelligence gathering on behalf of your firm should not misrepresent their identity or intent in gathering competitive intelligence information.
  • Misrepresentation of one’s identity and misrepresentation of intent are unethical and improper means of gathering competitive sensitive information and can interfere with an employee’s duty to their employer.

{ 0 comments }

Traditionally, companies gather information on their competitor’s marketing activities,  advertising strategies and organizational structure, or perform some form of industry-wide benchmarking.  Recently, however, companies have started to engage in more formal competitive intelligence activities.  “Competitive intelligence” is the process whereby a firm monitors its competitors (and the marketplace as a whole) by collecting information, analyzing the information and then disseminating the information to decision makers within the firm.  The widespread use of formal competitive intelligence departments and employees dedicated to such monitoring is probably less than two decades old.

Engaging in competitive intelligence is not the same as, or synonymous with, engaging in economic or industrial espionage or the misappropriation of trade secrets.  (As a review, a “trade secret” is information that an owner has taken reasonable steps to keep secret, and from which the owner derives economic value as a result of the information not being generally known by the public.  “Confidential information,” on the other hand, simply refers to information that an owner has taken reasonable steps to keep confidential.)

As a relatively new discipline, there are few standards for competitive intelligence professionals to follow.  The following general types of activities, however, raise potential ethical and legal concerns and should be avoided in the course of performing competitive intelligence activities:

  • Misrepresentation of Identity – when an information gatherer or competitive intelligence professional is asked their identity and they do not correctly and fully reveal their identity.
  • Misrepresentation of  Intent – when an information gatherer or competitive intelligence professional misrepresents their intent to a target in the course of gathering competitive intelligence.
  • Inducement –when an information gatherer offers inappropriate benefits in return for information from others in possession of confidential or trade secret information.
  • Covert Information Gathering – when information is being gathered while the targeted person/firm is unaware of its collection and such person/firm would have to develop elaborate defenses to protect its confidential or trade secret information.
  • Unsolicited Information – when confidential or trade secret information is received by an information gatherer that is not actively seeking it.

Engaging in the general types of activities listed above can have serious legal consequences for a firm and even the individual employee who obtains any competitor’s confidential information or trade secrets.  Such negative consequences include liability under the federal Uniform Trade Secrets Act and applicable state statutes protecting trade secrets and unfair competition, susceptibility to  breach of contract claims, and running afoul of the Economic Espionage Act of 1996.

{ 0 comments }

Raising Capital: Is Intellectual Property Addressed in Your Business Plan?

February 5, 2010

It is an obvious fact that the ability to raise capital is vital to many small (especially “high-tech”) businesses. In doing so, small business founders and other entrepreneurs spend a significant amount of time drafting a business plan and toiling with presentation slides. Those plans invariably define a market, describe the new service or product [...]

Read the full article →

Nine Considerations When Drafting Art Exhibition Loan Agreements

January 31, 2010

It is not uncommon for museums (or other artistic, non-profit and philanthropic organizations) to organize art exhibits which include works of art (e.g., paintings, sculptures, etc.) that are not owned by the museum itself.  In such cases, the museum curator must borrow the desired works from their owners (i.e., the artist themselves, other museums, corporations [...]

Read the full article →

Accelerated Patent Examination Process Now Available for “Green” Technologies

January 25, 2010

On December 7, 2009, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced a new pilot program that would make certain green technology-related patent applications available for an accelerated examination process.  The goal of the pilot program is to reduce the current pendency period of “green tech” patent applications, which is approximately 40 months from [...]

Read the full article →

12 Important Considerations For IP License Agreements (Part 3 of 3)

January 19, 2010

9. Invalid IP.  An IP-related agreement is, by definition, about IP rights in the form of exclusive rights to do certain acts or the right to exclude others from doing certain acts.  That is, after all, the whole point of IP rights.  Thus, when the parties negotiate an IP agreement, their expectations are based upon [...]

Read the full article →

12 Important Considerations For IP License Agreements (Part 2 of 3)

January 15, 2010

5. Obligations.  In order for the parties to be happy during the course of performance under the agreement, each party must tailor their behavior to conform to the other party’s expectations.  Thus, besides the transfer of IP rights, the agreement must clearly set forth the respective obligations of the parties so that no side becomes [...]

Read the full article →

12 Important Considerations for Drafting IP License Agreements (Part 1 of 3)

January 10, 2010

1. Recitals.  Often overlooked and underdeveloped, the recitals (i.e., the “Whereas” statements that begin most agreements) should “set the stage” for a third-party reader of the agreement.  Generally speaking, in a later dispute, the recitals are presumed to be true statements held against both parties.  Thus, the recitals should tell the story about how the [...]

Read the full article →

12 Important Considerations For Non-Disclosure (Confidentiality) Agreements

January 4, 2010

Happy New Year!  With the second decade of the new millennium upon us, I wanted to discuss the most common agreement individuals and companies enter into that affects intellectual property – the Non-Disclosure (i.e., Confidentiality) Agreement.  While this type of agreement is no doubt considered “routine” or “standard,” maybe this is a good time to [...]

Read the full article →

Intellectual Property Due Diligence in Corporate Transactions: A Checklist for SMEs

December 29, 2009

I have often written that the lifeblood of any small (and especially high-technology) enterprise is the intellectual property (IP) that it controls or potentially controls.  In other words, the short-term salability, the long-term profitability, and the eventual ability to undertake an initial public offering of the small company all depend upon its ability to develop, [...]

Read the full article →