[andriy_koval]

I have two issues with your citations:

1. I don't have time to read all this copy-paste.

2. Your citations express personal opinion of someone unknown without any grounding in any laws and cases in specific jurisdiction, thus not interesting.

[shagie]

The author is nominally Daren Tang of WIPO.

https://www.wipo.int/web-publications/wipo-guide-to-trade-se...

    ...

    Trade secrets have been hidden gems for too long. It is time to bring them into the light, so that they can truly sparkle. Whether you are a policymaker or business manager, a researcher or entrepreneur, we hope this Guide helps you to see the power of trade secrets and the value they bring to businesses strategies and global innovation.

    Daren Tang
    Director General
    World Intellectual Property Organization

---

The documentation about the organization is at https://www.wipo.int/en/web/about-wipo

    The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is the United Nations agency that serves the world’s innovators and creators, ensuring that their ideas travel safely to the market and improve lives everywhere.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIPO_Copyright_Treaty

    The World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty (WIPO Copyright Treaty or WCT) is an international treaty on copyright law adopted by the member states of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in 1996. It provides additional protections for copyright to respond to advances in information technology since the formation of previous copyright treaties before it.

[andriy_koval]

thank you for all your irrelevant citations and speculations.

the question is still open if that guide is grounded into US legal landscape in any way. Unlike good quality legal literature which grounds every statement into law or case law, that guide does nothing.

[shagie]

The part "Copyright is another form of intellectual property protection available to code and algorithms. However, it should be noted that certain jurisdictions do not permit an owner to assert both trade secret and copyright, especially if the copyrighted software discloses a majority of the source code or the “proprietary” portions. (2)" provides a link to Capricorn Management Systems, Inc. v. Government Employees Insurance Co.

The decision can be read at https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/new-york/ny...

That decision is about if something can be both a trade secret and copyrighted.

[andriy_koval]

> That decision is about if something can be both a trade secret and copyrighted.

I think you completely made up this part. My reading is that court said that Capricorn failed to met criteria to establish trade secret and even violation didn't happen at all. Also, it was district court ruling which doesn't establish any case law.

* Capricorn did not treat Supercede as confidential.

* merely listed functionalities of Supercede and did not allege how such functionalities constituted a unique trade secret.

* DePace, Capricorn's primary coder of Supercede, did not believe Defendants had copied Supercede,