Sec. 2. As used in this chapter, unless the context
requires otherwise:
"Improper means" includes theft, bribery, misrepresentation, breach
or inducement of a breach of a duty to maintain secrecy, or espionage
through electronic or other means.
"Misappropriation" means:
(1) acquisition of a trade secret of another by a person who knows
or has reason to know that the trade secret was acquired by
improper means; or
(2) disclosure or use of a trade secret of another without express
or implied consent by a person who:
(A) used improper means to acquire knowledge of the trade
secret;
(B) at the time of disclosure or use, knew or had reason to know
that his knowledge of the trade secret was:
(i) derived from or through a person who had utilized
improper means to acquire it;
(ii) acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to
maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or
(iii) derived from or through a person who owed a duty to the
person seeking relief to maintain its secrecy or limit its use;
or
(C) before a material change of his position, knew or had reason
to know that it was a trade secret and that knowledge of it had
been acquired by accident or mistake.
"Person" means a natural person, limited liability company,
corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, association, joint
venture, government, governmental subdivision or agency, or any other
legal or commercial entity.
"Trade secret" means information, including a formula, pattern,
compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that:
(1) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from
not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable
by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic
value from its disclosure or use; and
(2) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the
circumstances to maintain its secrecy.
As added by Acts 1982, P.L.148, SEC.1. Amended by
P.L.8-1993, SEC.343.
Notes of Decisions
Infinity Prods., Inc. v. Quandt, 810 N.E.2d 1028 (Ind. 2004).
· cites it 12× “Ind.Code Ann. § 24-2-3-2 (West 1988). [6] It is thus displaced by the provisions of the uniform act.”
Amoco Prod. Co. v. Laird, 622 N.E.2d 912 (Ind. 1993).
· cites it 14× “Amoco argues that Ind. Code § 24-2-3-2 , the definitional component of the Indiana Uniform Trade Secrets Act, 1 unambiguously sets forth in part that a trade secret refers to information not known to and “not being readily ascertainable” through proper means by others who can…”
U.S. Land Servs., Inc. v. U.S. Surveyor, Inc., 826 N.E.2d 49 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 12× “Ind.Code § 24-2-3-2, -3. The Act defines "trade secret" as follows: information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that: (1) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and…”
Infinity Prods., Inc. v. Quandt, 775 N.E.2d 1144 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 11× “Ind.Code § 24-2-3-2. "Trade secret" is defined as information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that: (1) derives independent economic value actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily…”
Zemco Mfg., Inc. v. Navistar Int'l Transp. Corp., 759 N.E.2d 239 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 4× “Ind.Code § 24-2-3-2. This definition has been interpreted by our courts to mean that a protectable trade seeret has four general characteristics: 1) information; 2) deriving independent economic value; 3) not generally known, or readily ascertainable by proper means by others…”
Steve Silveus Ins., Inc. v. Goshert, 873 N.E.2d 165 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 4× “Ind.Code § 24-2-3-2. Thus, a protectable trade secret has four characteristics: (1) information, (2) which derives independent economic value, (3) is not generally known, or readily ascertainable by proper means by other persons who can obtain economic value, from its disclosure…”
Ackerman v. Kimball Int'l, Inc., 652 N.E.2d 507 (Ind. 1995).
· cites it 4× “The employer based its claim for injunctive relief on two grounds: (1) the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Indiana Code §§ 24-2-3-2 & 3 (1993) and (2) two covenants made by employee in his employment contract, one not to disclose trade secrets and the other not to compete with…”
Bridgestone Americas Holding, Inc. v. Mayberry, 854 N.E.2d 355 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 4× “Ind.Code § 24-2-3-2. Thus, a protectable trade secret has four characteristics: (1) information, (2) which derives independent economic value, (8) is not generally known, or readily ascertainable by proper means by other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure…”
Hydraulic Exch. & Repair, Inc. v. KM Specialty Pumps, Inc., 690 N.E.2d 782 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 4× “The IUT-SA defines “trade secret” as: [I]nformation, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that: (1) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily…”
— Ind. Code § 24-2-3-2(1) — 1 case
— Ind. Code § 24-2-3-2(2)(B) — 1 case
— Ind. Code § 24-2-3-2(2)(B)(ii) — 1 case
— Ind. Code § 24-2-3-2(2)(B)(iii) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.