As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires:
1. “Improper means” means theft, bribery, misrepresentation, breach or inducement of a breach of a duty to maintain secrecy, or espionage, including but not limited to espionage through an electronic device.
2. “Knows” or “knowledge” means that a person has actual knowledge of information or a circumstance or that the person has reason to know of the information or circumstance.
3. “Misappropriation” means doing any of the following:
a. Acquisition of a trade secret by a person who knows that the trade secret is acquired by improper means.
b. Disclosure or use of a trade secret by a person who uses improper means to acquire the trade secret.
c. Disclosure or use of a trade secret by a person who at the time of disclosure or use, knows that the trade secret is derived from or through a person who had utilized improper means to acquire the trade secret.
d. Disclosure or use of a trade secret by a person who at the time of disclosure or use knows that the trade secret is acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain its secrecy or limit its use.
e. Disclosure or use of a trade secret by a person who at the time of disclosure or use knows that the trade secret is derived from or through a person who owes a duty to maintain the trade secret’s secrecy or limit its use.
f. Disclosure or use of a trade secret by a person who, before a material change in the person’s position, knows that the information is a trade secret and that the trade secret has been acquired by accident or mistake.
4. “Trade secret” means information, including but not limited to a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process that is both of the following:
a. Derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by a person able to obtain economic value from its disclosure or use.
b. Is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy. 90 Acts, ch 1201, §2; 91 Acts, ch 35, §1 Referred to in §716.6B \n
Notes of Decisions
Interbake Foods, L.L.C. v. Tomasiello, 461 F. Supp. 2d 943 (N.D. Iowa 2006).
· cites it 39× “In Economy Roofing, the Iowa Supreme Court reaffirmed its broad interpretation of the definition of “trade secret” under Iowa Code § 550.2 (4): In a recent case we gave a broad interpretation of “information” that could legally constitute “trade secrets”: Under the plain…”
Cent. States Indus. Supply, Inc. v. McCullough, 279 F. Supp. 2d 1005 (N.D. Iowa 2003).
· cites it 39× “Count III of the Complaint, denominated “Iowa Trade Secrets Act,” alleges that, in the course of his employment with CPI, McCullough had access to and became intimately familiar with CPI’s trade secrets, as defined by Iowa Code § 550.2 (4), and that McCullough’s taking of CPI’s…”
Walker Mfg., Inc. v. Hoffmann, Inc., 261 F. Supp. 2d 1054 (N.D. Iowa 2003).
· cites it 26× “Definition of a “trade secret” Iowa Code § 550.2 (4) defines a trade secret as: [I]nformation, including but not limited to a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process that is both of the following: a.”
Am. Express Fin. Advisors, Inc. v. Yantis, 358 F. Supp. 2d 818 (N.D. Iowa 2005).
· cites it 20× “The question of law involved in making such a determination is whether the information at issue constitutes a trade secret under the first part of the definition of “trade secret” set forth in Iowa Code § 550.2 (4). This section defines “trade secret” as “information, including…”
Cemen Tech, Inc. v. Three D Indus., L.L.C., 753 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 2008).
· cites it 6× “Iowa Code § 550.2 (4). The Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition (1995) [hereinafter Restatement] *7 is intended to be consistent with the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, such as our Code chapter 550, and we rely on it here.”
Olson v. Nieman's, Ltd., 579 N.W.2d 299 (Iowa 1998).
· cites it 8× “Iowa Code § 550.2 (4) (emphasis added). Nieman argues that Olson’s device was generally known and readily ascertainable by proper means and was not economically valuable from not being generally known.”
— Iowa Code § 550.2(1) — 7 cases
Interbake Foods, L.L.C. v. Tomasiello, 461 F. Supp. 2d 943 (N.D. Iowa 2006).
“In Economy Roofing, the Iowa Supreme Court reaffirmed its broad interpretation of the definition of “trade secret” under Iowa Code § 550.2 (4): In a recent case we gave a broad interpretation of “information” that could legally constitute “trade secrets”: Under the plain…”
— Iowa Code § 550.2(2) — 1 case
— Iowa Code § 550.2(3) — 9 cases
Interbake Foods, L.L.C. v. Tomasiello, 461 F. Supp. 2d 943 (N.D. Iowa 2006).
“In Economy Roofing, the Iowa Supreme Court reaffirmed its broad interpretation of the definition of “trade secret” under Iowa Code § 550.2 (4): In a recent case we gave a broad interpretation of “information” that could legally constitute “trade secrets”: Under the plain…”
Olson v. Nieman's, Ltd., 579 N.W.2d 299 (Iowa 1998).
“Iowa Code § 550.2 (4) (emphasis added). Nieman argues that Olson’s device was generally known and readily ascertainable by proper means and was not economically valuable from not being generally known.”
— Iowa Code § 550.2(3)(a) — 1 case
Cent. States Indus. Supply, Inc. v. McCullough, 279 F. Supp. 2d 1005 (N.D. Iowa 2003).
“Count III of the Complaint, denominated “Iowa Trade Secrets Act,” alleges that, in the course of his employment with CPI, McCullough had access to and became intimately familiar with CPI’s trade secrets, as defined by Iowa Code § 550.2 (4), and that McCullough’s taking of CPI’s…”
— Iowa Code § 550.2(3)(b) — 6 cases
Interbake Foods, L.L.C. v. Tomasiello, 461 F. Supp. 2d 943 (N.D. Iowa 2006).
“In Economy Roofing, the Iowa Supreme Court reaffirmed its broad interpretation of the definition of “trade secret” under Iowa Code § 550.2 (4): In a recent case we gave a broad interpretation of “information” that could legally constitute “trade secrets”: Under the plain…”
Cent. States Indus. Supply, Inc. v. McCullough, 279 F. Supp. 2d 1005 (N.D. Iowa 2003).
“Count III of the Complaint, denominated “Iowa Trade Secrets Act,” alleges that, in the course of his employment with CPI, McCullough had access to and became intimately familiar with CPI’s trade secrets, as defined by Iowa Code § 550.2 (4), and that McCullough’s taking of CPI’s…”
— Iowa Code § 550.2(3)(d) — 1 case
Cent. States Indus. Supply, Inc. v. McCullough, 279 F. Supp. 2d 1005 (N.D. Iowa 2003).
“Count III of the Complaint, denominated “Iowa Trade Secrets Act,” alleges that, in the course of his employment with CPI, McCullough had access to and became intimately familiar with CPI’s trade secrets, as defined by Iowa Code § 550.2 (4), and that McCullough’s taking of CPI’s…”
— Iowa Code § 550.2(4) — 25 cases
Interbake Foods, L.L.C. v. Tomasiello, 461 F. Supp. 2d 943 (N.D. Iowa 2006).
“In Economy Roofing, the Iowa Supreme Court reaffirmed its broad interpretation of the definition of “trade secret” under Iowa Code § 550.2 (4): In a recent case we gave a broad interpretation of “information” that could legally constitute “trade secrets”: Under the plain…”
Cemen Tech, Inc. v. Three D Indus., L.L.C., 753 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 2008).
“Iowa Code § 550.2 (4). The Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition (1995) [hereinafter Restatement] *7 is intended to be consistent with the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, such as our Code chapter 550, and we rely on it here.”
— Iowa Code § 550.2(4)(1) — 1 case
Walker Mfg., Inc. v. Hoffmann, Inc., 261 F. Supp. 2d 1054 (N.D. Iowa 2003).
“Definition of a “trade secret” Iowa Code § 550.2 (4) defines a trade secret as: [I]nformation, including but not limited to a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process that is both of the following: a.”
— Iowa Code § 550.2(4)(6) — 1 case
— Iowa Code § 550.2(4)(a) — 10 cases
Interbake Foods, L.L.C. v. Tomasiello, 461 F. Supp. 2d 943 (N.D. Iowa 2006).
“In Economy Roofing, the Iowa Supreme Court reaffirmed its broad interpretation of the definition of “trade secret” under Iowa Code § 550.2 (4): In a recent case we gave a broad interpretation of “information” that could legally constitute “trade secrets”: Under the plain…”
Olson v. Nieman's, Ltd., 579 N.W.2d 299 (Iowa 1998).
“Iowa Code § 550.2 (4) (emphasis added). Nieman argues that Olson’s device was generally known and readily ascertainable by proper means and was not economically valuable from not being generally known.”
— Iowa Code § 550.2(4)(b) — 6 cases
Interbake Foods, L.L.C. v. Tomasiello, 461 F. Supp. 2d 943 (N.D. Iowa 2006).
“In Economy Roofing, the Iowa Supreme Court reaffirmed its broad interpretation of the definition of “trade secret” under Iowa Code § 550.2 (4): In a recent case we gave a broad interpretation of “information” that could legally constitute “trade secrets”: Under the plain…”
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.