THE NDA: A VALUABLE IP TOOL JURISDICTION REPORT: US—PATENTS
Paul J. Sutton Sutton Magidoff LLP
The NDA
One of the most commonly used contracts covering intellectual property is the nondisclosure agreement. Commonly known under the acronym NDA, it is also referred to as a confidentiality agreement, a confidential disclosure agreement, a proprietary information agreement and a secrecy agreement. While NDAs will vary in length and complexity, their most basic function is to create a confidential relationship between parties, such that shared confidential and proprietary information will not be disclosed to third parties without prior authorisation. NDAs can be mutual, or they may restrict only one of the signatories.
Purpose and scope
Parties to NDAs are oſten companies and/or individuals who are contemplating working or doing business with one another, by way of making investments or entering into manufacturing or licence arrangements. Tey typically require access to certain of the other’s confidential information in order to decide whether to proceed with further discussions or a definitive business agreement. As observed by Melissa C. Marsh in her 2009 article California Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreements, typical circumstances where an NDA would be appropriate include: protecting a non-patented invention or idea that requires presentment to a potential investor, business partner or manufacturer to develop a prototype; presentation of sensitive financial and other business records and information to a prospective purchaser or investor in your business; presentation of a new product not yet available to the public to a prospective customer, buyer or licensee; presentation of sensitive business information to an independent contractor, or outside business, for the purpose of having them provide a service; or disclosure, on an as-needed basis, of sensitive business information required for an employee to effectively perform his or her duties.
NDA content
Every NDA should: specifically define the nature of the confidential information to be disclosed and whether such information must be labelled as confidential; identify the ownership rights to the information to be disclosed; describe the purpose behind the disclosure of the confidential information; list information that is not to be considered confidential, such as information already in the public domain; specify how the receiving party must protect the confidential information, limit its use or disclosure, and return or destroy the confidential information provided; set forth the duration of the agreement and the obligations; and identify remedies in the event of a breach, or threatened breach.
www.worldipreview.com
NDA versus patent rights Importantly, NDAs provide owners of IP and confidential information
with a type of protection that is quite distinct from and can be additional to patent protection. Te rights of parties to NDAs arise out of contract law, an entirely distinct field from patent law. When disputes arise under contracts such as NDAs, they are interpreted under state law, which varies from state to state. Disputes involving patents, on the other hand, are governed by federal statutes that are interpreted uniformly by federal courts throughout the US.
It is not widely appreciated how important the NDA can be as a tool to augment patent protection. As observed by Richard Goldstein at Goldstein Patent La, there are some scenarios where the NDA provides inadequate protection when compared to patents, while other scenarios enable the NDA to provide superior protection. For example:
• Many forms of confidential information and data do not rise to the level of an ‘invention’ capable of being patented. Accordingly, business concepts, marketing and advertising ideas that can never be protected by patent rights need to be safeguarded by way of NDA.
• Te owners of ideas that may be patentable sometimes choose to keep them as trade secrets and not pursue patents for them. Here, again, the NDA will serve a useful purpose.
• NDAs serve the purpose of establishing a party’s actual receipt of confidential information, thereby setting the stage for later proving derivation in a theſt of trade secret dispute. However, the NDA will not provide protection except as against signatories and those in privity with them.
Conclusion
Te wisest approach when exposing confidential information and ideas to others is to pursue both patent protection, where meaningful protection is available, as well as an NDA to safeguard this information. If a patentable idea is ‘stolen’ by a party with whom you have entered into an NDA, you will have recourse both for breach of contract under state law and will be able to recover for patent infringement under federal patent statutes. And you will have protection for non-patentable ideas and information.
Paul J. Sutton is a founding partner of Sutton Magidoff LLP. He can be contacted at:
paul@suttonmagidoff.com.
World Intellectual Property Review May/June 2011 73
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84