Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Företagshemligheternas värde - En kritisk studie om möjligheten att bevissäkra angrepp på företagshemligheter

Eliasson, Fredrik LU (2022) JURM02 20221
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
En parts tillgång till information i en rättegång blir ofta avgörande för hur väl denne kan tillvarata sin rätt. Det är som huvudregel upp till parterna själva att anskaffa informationen, men det finns undantag. För de fall en informations-innehavare vid den utomprocessuella informationsanskaffningen inte med-verkar kan domstolen ibland bistå med informationsanskaffningen.

Informationsanskaffningen vid en tvist avseende angrepp på immateriella rättigheter och företagshemligheter kan ofta bli komplicerad. Är angriparen en konkurrent behandlar även denne de angripna hemligheterna som sina hemligheter. Rättegångsbalkens (RB) regler om edition och exhibition är de regler som primärt reglerar den inomprocessuella informationsanskaffningen.... (More)
En parts tillgång till information i en rättegång blir ofta avgörande för hur väl denne kan tillvarata sin rätt. Det är som huvudregel upp till parterna själva att anskaffa informationen, men det finns undantag. För de fall en informations-innehavare vid den utomprocessuella informationsanskaffningen inte med-verkar kan domstolen ibland bistå med informationsanskaffningen.

Informationsanskaffningen vid en tvist avseende angrepp på immateriella rättigheter och företagshemligheter kan ofta bli komplicerad. Är angriparen en konkurrent behandlar även denne de angripna hemligheterna som sina hemligheter. Rättegångsbalkens (RB) regler om edition och exhibition är de regler som primärt reglerar den inomprocessuella informationsanskaffningen. För bifall av ett editions- eller exhibitionsyrkande fordras, utöver de generella bifallsförutsättningarna för edition respektive exhibition, dels att synnerlig anledning föreligger, dels att åläggandet är proportionerligt; där graden av intrång svaranden har att tåla och resultatet av informationsanskaffningen hamnar i fokus.

Allt sedan Sveriges medlemskap i Världshandelsorganisationen, WTO, har angrepp på immateriella rättigheter och företagshemligheter diskuteras mer frekvent. Frågan om vad en innehavare av företagshemligheter kan göra för att bevisa att ett angrepp av dennes företagshemligheter ägt rum har diskuterats i olika sammanhang, där bevissäkringen av angrepp på företagshemligheter ofta ansetts vara bristfälliga.

Företagshemligheter och andra immateriella rättigheter som upphovsrätt och patent har sina skillnader. De olika rättigheterna har också påtagliga likheter. Mot bakgrund av det av WTO framtagna TRIPs-avtalet har såväl EU som den svenska lagstiftaren reformerat den enskildes möjligheter till inomprocessuell bevissäkring av angrepp på nyssnämnda rättigheter. För immaterialrättens vidkommande har två olika inomprocessuella informationsanskaffningsme-toder – intrångsundersökningen och informationsföreläggandet – vuxit fram. Informationsanskaffningsmetoderna intrångsundersökning och informations-föreläggande valdes emellertid medvetet bort av den svenska lagstiftaren för företagshemligheternas vidkommande.

Syftet med förevarande uppsats har varit att utreda och diskutera vilka inomprocessuella informationsanskaffningsmetoder som står till buds för en innehavare av företagshemligheter, särskilt sedan införandet av den nya lagen (2018:558) om företagshemligheter (LFH) fortsättningsvis utlämnar möjligheten till intrångsundersökning eller informationsföreläggande för angripna företagshemligheter. Syftet har därtill varit att se ifall den svenska regleringen om informationsanskaffning för företagshemligheter lever upp till de åtaganden Sverige har mot bl.a. WTO och TRIPs-avtalet och ifall andra inomprocessuella informationsanskaffningsmetoder hade varit mer adekvata i förhållande till dessa åtaganden.

Sammanfattningsvis har uppsatsen nått slutsatsen att det är förenat med stora svårigheter för företagshemlighetens innehavare att inomprocessuellt komma över information som visar att ett angrepp på dennes företagshemligheter ägt rum, vilket mot bakgrund av bl.a. TRIPs-avtalet och skyddsintresset för företagshemligheter framstår som en tveksam reglering. (Less)
Abstract
A party's access to information is crucial within the litigation process. In the event of a legal dispute, the main rule is that the parties must take care of gathering the necessary information on their own. However, there are exceptions. For those cases where the information holder does not cooperate, the court can assist with the information-gathering.

Obtaining information in the event of an attack on intellectual property rights or trade secrets can often be complicated. If the attacker is a competitor, they will also consider the information to be a trade secret. The Swedish Code of Judicial Procedure rules regarding the duty of disclosure and compulsory disclosure is the rules that primarily regulate information-gathering... (More)
A party's access to information is crucial within the litigation process. In the event of a legal dispute, the main rule is that the parties must take care of gathering the necessary information on their own. However, there are exceptions. For those cases where the information holder does not cooperate, the court can assist with the information-gathering.

Obtaining information in the event of an attack on intellectual property rights or trade secrets can often be complicated. If the attacker is a competitor, they will also consider the information to be a trade secret. The Swedish Code of Judicial Procedure rules regarding the duty of disclosure and compulsory disclosure is the rules that primarily regulate information-gathering assisted by the court. The approval of a motion to disclosure requires not only that the general conditions for duty of disclosure are fulfilled. Furthermore, the necessary prerequisite of an extraordinary reason must also be met to be able to impose the defendant to disclose their trade secrets. In addition, the imposition must also be proportionate to the infringement the defendant has to endure.

Since Sweden's membership in the World Trade Organization, WTO, attacks on intellectual property rights and trade secrets have been discussed more frequently. The question of what a trade secrets holder can do to prove that an attack on his trade secrets has taken place has been discussed in various contexts, where the securing of evidence of attacks on trade secrets is often considered to be deficient.

Trade secrets and other intellectual property rights such as copyright and patents have their differences. The different rights also have obvious similarities. In the light of the TRIPs agreement, drawn up by the WTO, both the EU and the Swedish legislature have reformed the individual's possibilities for information-gathering with the assistance of the court in terms of securing evidence of attacks on the aforementioned rights. In the case of intellectual property law, two different information-gathering methods – the infringement investigation and the injunction to produce information – have emerged. Furthermore, in these legislative processes, the infringement investigation and the injunction to produce information were deliberately chosen away by the Swedish legislator in the case of trade secrets.

The purpose of this essay has been to investigate and discuss which information-gathering methods, assisted by the court, that is available to a trade secret holder, especially since the Swedish reformed Act on the Protection of Trade Secrets further omits the possibility of an infringement investigation or injunction to produce information for the trade secrets holder. The purpose has also been to see if the Swedish regulation, concerning information-gathering assisted by the court for trade secrets, lives up to the commitments Sweden have against for example WTO and the TRIPs agreement, and if other information-gathering methods would have been more adequate in relation to these commitments.

In summary, the essay has reached the conclusion that it is associated with great difficulties for the trade secret holders to gather information assisted by the court in order to prove that an attack on the trade secrets has occurred. In the light of for example the TRIPs agreement and the underlying interest in protecting trade secrets, this appears to be a doubtful regulation. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Eliasson, Fredrik LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
The value of trade secrets - A critical study on the possibility of securing evidence of attacks on trade secrets
course
JURM02 20221
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
private law, civilrätt, processrätt, judicial procedure, företagshemligheter, trade secrets
language
Swedish
id
9080035
date added to LUP
2022-06-12 15:39:10
date last changed
2022-06-12 15:39:10
@misc{9080035,
  abstract     = {{A party's access to information is crucial within the litigation process. In the event of a legal dispute, the main rule is that the parties must take care of gathering the necessary information on their own. However, there are exceptions. For those cases where the information holder does not cooperate, the court can assist with the information-gathering.

Obtaining information in the event of an attack on intellectual property rights or trade secrets can often be complicated. If the attacker is a competitor, they will also consider the information to be a trade secret. The Swedish Code of Judicial Procedure rules regarding the duty of disclosure and compulsory disclosure is the rules that primarily regulate information-gathering assisted by the court. The approval of a motion to disclosure requires not only that the general conditions for duty of disclosure are fulfilled. Furthermore, the necessary prerequisite of an extraordinary reason must also be met to be able to impose the defendant to disclose their trade secrets. In addition, the imposition must also be proportionate to the infringement the defendant has to endure.

Since Sweden's membership in the World Trade Organization, WTO, attacks on intellectual property rights and trade secrets have been discussed more frequently. The question of what a trade secrets holder can do to prove that an attack on his trade secrets has taken place has been discussed in various contexts, where the securing of evidence of attacks on trade secrets is often considered to be deficient.

Trade secrets and other intellectual property rights such as copyright and patents have their differences. The different rights also have obvious similarities. In the light of the TRIPs agreement, drawn up by the WTO, both the EU and the Swedish legislature have reformed the individual's possibilities for information-gathering with the assistance of the court in terms of securing evidence of attacks on the aforementioned rights. In the case of intellectual property law, two different information-gathering methods – the infringement investigation and the injunction to produce information – have emerged. Furthermore, in these legislative processes, the infringement investigation and the injunction to produce information were deliberately chosen away by the Swedish legislator in the case of trade secrets.

The purpose of this essay has been to investigate and discuss which information-gathering methods, assisted by the court, that is available to a trade secret holder, especially since the Swedish reformed Act on the Protection of Trade Secrets further omits the possibility of an infringement investigation or injunction to produce information for the trade secrets holder. The purpose has also been to see if the Swedish regulation, concerning information-gathering assisted by the court for trade secrets, lives up to the commitments Sweden have against for example WTO and the TRIPs agreement, and if other information-gathering methods would have been more adequate in relation to these commitments.

In summary, the essay has reached the conclusion that it is associated with great difficulties for the trade secret holders to gather information assisted by the court in order to prove that an attack on the trade secrets has occurred. In the light of for example the TRIPs agreement and the underlying interest in protecting trade secrets, this appears to be a doubtful regulation.}},
  author       = {{Eliasson, Fredrik}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Företagshemligheternas värde - En kritisk studie om möjligheten att bevissäkra angrepp på företagshemligheter}},
  year         = {{2022}},
}