earticle

영어

This article tried to capture the specific characteristics of trade secret having recently emerging importance, which were easily overlooked when prior researchers stick only to trade secret itself, by the comparative analysis with patent and other intellectual property protection, etc. Before that, the requirement of independent economic value plus utility seems meaningless repetition in the definition of trade secrets and it is inappropriate for Korean statute to nominate How To Sell as one of only two examples for trade secrets. At first when doing comparative analysis, it is essential to understand that finding an equilibrium between the two protection system, trade secret as technology information and patent is always needed because those are closely related. Then, every issue including novelty and doctrine of equivalents which could arguably be common points should be carefully compared while legislative, executive, and judicial branch shall figure out what will be the problem in which trade secret and patent are related inextricably to each other, as illustrated in this article. The technology information among trade secrets obtained at office will revert to the employee under the Invention Promotion Act though the other part among trade secrets (management information) will probably be taken out by the employer. Finally, it seems premature to establish so-called the Trade Secret Act separated from the current Unfair Competition Prevention Act and the analysis through comparison even with copyrights shed a light on a way to go for an appropriate trade secret protection system in Korea.