This is false, there are thousands of examples of products 'in the wild' containing trade secrets that are difficult enough to figure out by reverse engineering that they are effectively considered such, even by industry experts.
e.g. Apple's fixed glass trackpads
Also by definition they cannot be 'invalidated' since trade secrets are never 'validated' in the first place, unlike patents, copyrights, or trademarks.
This is false, there are thousands of examples of products 'in the wild' containing trade secrets that are difficult enough to figure out by reverse engineering that they are effectively considered such, even by industry experts.
That's not how trade secrets work. If you give me a device, and I figure out how that part of it goes together, the trade secret dies. There is no protection except an attempt at secrecy, and once someone is retail sold hardware, they may do anything they choose with it, thus the idea of trying to maintain a secret, when it is in someone else's hands, is silly.
Also by definition they cannot be 'invalidated' since trade secrets are never 'validated' in the first place, unlike patents, copyrights, or trademarks.
Trade secrets are valid, until they no longer are. Copyright (in many jurisdictions) require no validation either, they're merely valid upon creation.
There is no validator for the 'validity' of trade secrets, it's simply nonsense to say that they can be 'validated' or 'invalidated'.
You can't dodge this point, which you appear to be doing as I never claimed copyright law is uniform in all jurisdictions worldwide, nor was that implied.
If you don't understand how these things work, it's better to not make bizarre claims.
I never claimed copyright law is uniform in all jurisdictions worldwide, nor was that implied.
What on earth are you even talking about?
Regardless, you can invalidate anything. EG, one can make a claim "Hey, that manufacturing process is my trade secret!", and that claim can most certainly be invalided. It can also be validated.
> Trade secrets are valid, until they no longer are. Copyright (in many jurisdictions) require no validation either, they're merely valid upon creation.
Some types of copyright requires approval via some organized entity in many jurisdictions, that is easily discoverable via a quick Google search by any passing reader. The prior comment appears like a deflection from the main point, since the fact that some jurisdictions operate differently is simply irrelevant as I never claimed otherwise, nor was that implied anywhere in the preceding comment chain.
Like I said you can't avoid the fact that 'invalidating' trade secrets makes no sense. They can be revealed, they can become so widely known that the label no longer applies, and so on.
But 'validity' whether legal, logical, etc., can not apply to them.
And in any case there are many real world products which so far have not been reverse engineered to a sufficient degree to recreate, such as the fixed glass trackpad previously mentioned. If you can prove otherwise then I would welcome a link.
Michael, my simple point was that copyright, like trade secrets, requires no validation in some jurisdictions by default. For some reason you view this as a distraction, instead, it was merely illustrative.
In terms of validation, I have no idea why you think one cannot invalidate someone claiming to have a trade secret. You can literally invalidate anything, someone is trying to assert as valid.
A bottle blonde could claim that is their original hair colour, and one could invalidate that claim too.
You seem stuck on an internal definition of 'validate'. Your internal definition seems wrong.
e.g. Apple's fixed glass trackpads
Also by definition they cannot be 'invalidated' since trade secrets are never 'validated' in the first place, unlike patents, copyrights, or trademarks.