The Commission wishes to create a standard level of protection and has decided that in order to be a “trade secret” as trade secret must have the following characteristics:

(a)     the information must be confidential;

(b)    the information should have commercial value; and

(c)   the trade secret holder should have made reasonable efforts to keep it confidential.

The Commission also set out a set of what are called “remedies” such as injunctions, seizure of goods as well as damages for losses suffered – none of these remedies will come as any surprise to any legal practitioner, rather, it is the ability to enforce them that will be key due to the above new definition of what constitutes a “trade secret” – it is hoped that this new arrow in the quiver of IP protection within the EU will further encourage businesses to do business within the EU safe in the knowledge that their intellectual property will be fully protected.

The only fly in the ointment is that it will probably take another say, 2 years before the law will be enacted in Ireland but if you have any problems in the meantime please do not hesitate to contact us at Reilly & Co, Solicitors.

My goal was to ensure that every attendee left with a working knowledge of the IP they held in their business and to recognise problems and challenges before they became an issue – I decided to put the “law bit” on the usual  Powerpoint slides but then introduced a full “character” based on my experiences on the front line dealing with business people every day – the trick then was to apply the law to the facts in the same way I do when giving tutorials at the Law Society – this meant that the day itself was challenging and demanding but I can say that each business person left recognising every single piece of IP that I presented to them and could cite how they could in theory protect it – personally I find a day like that to be rewarding and it certainly keeps me on my feet to answer all the questions being thrown at me !

I am giving another similiar lecture/tutorial next week in University of Limerick and am looking forward to it and have designed a different scenario in order to keep it all fresh and alive – this scenario will incorporate every type of IP from registering trademarks, to copyright issues to include the protection of computer software and how to fully exploit it via licensing agreements etc.

If you would like to discuss any of the above issues then please do not hesitate to contact me for a no obligation chat on 023 88 21919 or 086 252 9483.

Kind regards,

David Reilly

Reilly & Co, Solicitors

–          misusing the company’s confidential information;

–          infringing the firms’ database rights; and

–          breaching the terms of his employment contract as a result of his activities.

In addition, the companies that received the information were also found guilty of:

–          breach of confidence;

–          infringement of Sky’s trade mark;

–          infringement of Sky’s database rights; and

–          the tort of “passing off” (allows owners of marks to gain protection over marks that are not registered trademarks).

Interestingly, not only were the companies found guilty but so were the shareholders behind them as the Judge held that the shareholders “were all liable along with the now liquidated companies for the offences” because they were fully aware of their activities and the marketing use they had in mind for the client database.

We at Reilly & Co, Solicitors come across this problem time and time again and would urge all businesses to look at their employment contracts (and put them in place if they do not have any) and just as importantly to keep their client list safe and secure (practical avoidance) and to only allow access to confidential information to those employees that really need to have access to it – businesses should also look to trademark their valuable tradenames and generally look to protect their business intellectual property.

In addition, we also find that a good deal of confidential information has been “shared” (knowingly and unknowingly) via social media sites and emails as well as lost lap tops, memory sticks, as well as smart phones (encrypt and then know how to remotely wipe, and prior to the loss!) all of which can prompt a friendly (maybe) visit from the Data Commissioner or any number of other problems such as online defamation etc.

If you would like to discuss any aspect of the above please just call us on 02388 21919 or email us on info@dreilly.ie for a no obligation chat.

This was an interesting case as normally colours are only capable of registration as trademarks if they have acquired distinctive character through use (think of an “Orange” square for example) and can be represented graphically (hence the reference to the Pantone chart of colours). Nestle had waded into the fight with its view that Cadbury had not sufficient goodwill in the particular shade of purple in question but the Jude said in his ruling that:

“Since single colours per se are, as a matter of European law, capable of being signs … (i.e. they are capable of being a sign, capable of being represented graphically and capable of distinguishing) then … in my judgment the colour purple (Pantone 2685C) applied to the whole visible surface, or being the predominant colour applied to the whole visible surface, of the packaging of chocolate, is capable of being a sign within [the terms of EU trade mark law]”.

It is noteworthy that the Judge restricted the trademark to “milk chocolate in bar and tablet form; milk chocolate for eating; drinking chocolate [and] preparations for making drinking chocolate” only, but, overall it has to be said that it was a successful day for Cadbury.

If you require any assistance with trademarks then please contact David Reilly on dreilly@dreilly.i.e or on 086 252 9483.