本文關(guān)鍵詞： 潛在侵占 競(jìng)業(yè)禁止 不可避免披露原則 商業(yè)秘密權(quán) 擇業(yè)自由權(quán)　出處：《上海交通大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：對(duì)商業(yè)秘密的潛在侵占通常發(fā)生在雇傭關(guān)系終止之后，此時(shí)知悉原雇主商業(yè)秘密的離職雇員若到原雇主的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手處工作將會(huì)對(duì)原雇主的商業(yè)秘密構(gòu)成潛在的威脅，因?yàn)殡x職雇員在履行新職務(wù)的過(guò)程中將極有可能侵害原雇主的商業(yè)秘密。實(shí)踐中對(duì)潛在侵占的防止可以通過(guò)雇傭關(guān)系中的競(jìng)業(yè)禁止協(xié)議來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)，也可以通過(guò)不可避免披露原則來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)。不可避免披露原則是從美國(guó)商業(yè)秘密保護(hù)的判例法中發(fā)展出來(lái)的一種禁令救濟(jì)原則，，該原則幾乎同美國(guó)商業(yè)秘密法律保護(hù)制度同時(shí)產(chǎn)生。不可避免披露原則在早期發(fā)展階段常常同競(jìng)業(yè)禁止協(xié)議的適用相聯(lián)系，因而一直沒(méi)有引起人們的注意，直到第七巡回法院的PepsiCo案之后才受到普遍關(guān)注。在PepsiCo案之后涉及不可避免披露原則的案例在美國(guó)日見增多，但是美國(guó)各州法院對(duì)該原則的態(tài)度卻各不相同，有承認(rèn)的、有拒絕的、也有承認(rèn)但嚴(yán)格適用的、還有先承認(rèn)后又拒絕的，這是因?yàn)椴豢杀苊馀对瓌t的適用涉及雇主商業(yè)秘密權(quán)與離職雇員擇業(yè)自由權(quán)的沖突。法院在適用該原則時(shí)必須對(duì)這兩個(gè)沖突的利益予以權(quán)衡，決定取舍。法院對(duì)這一利益沖突采取的政策立場(chǎng)不同，則對(duì)該原則的態(tài)度也就不同。PepsiCo案作為美國(guó)當(dāng)代商業(yè)秘密法中適用不可避免披露原則的典型案例，其意義在于構(gòu)建了不可避免披露原則適用的基本框架，給出了適用不可避免披露原則時(shí)應(yīng)考慮的要素。其中有些要素是適用不可避免披露原則必須具備的，而有些要素雖不是必須具備的，但是可以作為論證適用不可避免披露原則的理由。不可避免披露原則的出現(xiàn)是商業(yè)秘密本質(zhì)特征的要求，是美國(guó)商業(yè)秘密保護(hù)理論和立法不斷發(fā)展的必然產(chǎn)物，是同商業(yè)秘密范圍的不斷擴(kuò)大和對(duì)商業(yè)秘密保護(hù)力度的日益增強(qiáng)相適應(yīng)的。 我國(guó)商業(yè)秘密保護(hù)的立法雖在不斷的完善中，但是在防止商業(yè)秘密潛在侵占方面卻沒(méi)有明確的規(guī)定。我國(guó)《勞動(dòng)合同法》所建立的競(jìng)業(yè)禁止制度，雖然其目的在于防止對(duì)商業(yè)秘密的潛在侵占，但是在我國(guó)的具體國(guó)情下，法院對(duì)其適用的結(jié)果沒(méi)有體現(xiàn)出對(duì)雇主商業(yè)秘密權(quán)和離職雇員擇業(yè)自由權(quán)的平衡，更多的是對(duì)離職雇員擇業(yè)自由權(quán)的限制。因此為了完善我國(guó)的商業(yè)秘密保護(hù)制度，建議法院在司法實(shí)踐中借鑒美國(guó)的不可避免披露原則，在涉及商業(yè)秘密的潛在侵占的案件中，當(dāng)雇傭關(guān)系中存在競(jìng)業(yè)禁止協(xié)議時(shí)，以不可避免披露原則來(lái)審查競(jìng)業(yè)禁止協(xié)議是否可以執(zhí)行，當(dāng)雇傭關(guān)系中缺少競(jìng)業(yè)禁止協(xié)議時(shí)，可直接以不可避免披露原則來(lái)禁止離職雇員到新雇主處就職。在對(duì)不可避免披露原則予以適用時(shí)要考察原雇主有沒(méi)有商業(yè)秘密、離職雇員是否知悉商業(yè)秘密、新舊雇主之間是否有競(jìng)爭(zhēng)關(guān)系、離職雇員的新舊工作有沒(méi)有相似性等規(guī)定性要素及離職雇員和新雇主的主觀態(tài)度等非規(guī)定性要素。
[Abstract]:The potential encroachment on trade secrets usually occurs after the termination of the employment relationship. A former employee who is aware of the former employer's trade secrets will pose a potential threat to the former employer's trade secrets if he works with the former employer's competitors. In practice, the prevention of potential encroachment can be achieved through the non-competition agreement in the employment relationship. It can also be realized by the principle of inevitable disclosure, which is a kind of injunction relief principle developed from the case law of the protection of trade secrets in the United States. This principle almost comes into being at the same time with the legal protection system of American trade secret. The principle of inevitable disclosure is often associated with the application of non-compete agreement in the early stage of development, so it has not attracted people's attention. It wasn't until after the PepsiCo case in the 7th Circuit that there was a growing number of cases involving the principle of inevitable disclosure after the PepsiCo case. However, the attitude of the American state courts to this principle is different, there are some to admit, some to refuse, some to recognize but to apply strictly, and some to recognize and then to reject. This is because the application of the principle of inevitable disclosure involves the conflict between the right of the employer to trade secrets and the right of a former employee to choose a career. The court must weigh the interests of the two conflicts when applying the principle. Decisions on trade-offs. The Court's policy position on this conflict of interest is different. Then the attitude to this principle is also different. PepsiCo case as a typical case of the application of the principle of inevitable disclosure in the contemporary American trade secrets law. Its significance lies in the construction of the basic framework for the application of the unavoidable disclosure principle and the elements to be considered in the application of the unavoidable disclosure principle, some of which must be possessed by the application of the unavoidable disclosure principle. Although some elements are not necessary, they can be used as the reason to demonstrate the application of the principle of inevitable disclosure. The emergence of the principle of inevitable disclosure is the requirement of the essential characteristics of trade secrets. It is the inevitable outcome of the continuous development of the trade secret protection theory and legislation in the United States. It is adapted to the expanding scope of trade secret and the increasing strength of trade secret protection. Although the legislation on the protection of trade secrets in our country is constantly improving, there is no clear stipulation in preventing the potential encroachment of trade secrets. The prohibition system of non-competition established in the Labor contract Law of our country. Although its purpose is to prevent the potential encroachment on the trade secret, but under the concrete situation of our country, the result of the court's application to it does not reflect the balance between the employer's right to trade secret and the right to choose a job for the former employee. Therefore, in order to perfect our country's trade secret protection system, it is suggested that the court should draw lessons from the inevitable disclosure principle of the United States in judicial practice. In cases involving potential encroachment of trade secrets, when there is a non-compete agreement in the employment relationship, the principle of inevitable disclosure is used to examine whether the non-compete agreement can be enforced. When there is no non-compete agreement in the employment relationship. The principle of inevitable disclosure can be directly used to prohibit a former employee from taking up employment with a new employer. When the principle of inevitable disclosure is applied, it is necessary to examine whether the former employer has any trade secrets and whether the former employee knows the trade secret. Whether there is a competitive relationship between the old and the new employers, whether there are any prescriptive factors such as the similarity between the new and the old jobs of the former employees and the subjective attitude of the former employees and the new employers, etc.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海交通大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D922.294

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 祝磊;;不可避免披露原則的證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)與適用限制——以美國(guó)商業(yè)秘密判例法為中心展開[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2007年09期

2 祝磊;;美國(guó)商業(yè)秘密法不可避免披露原則研究[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)輯刊;2008年04期

本文編號(hào)：1464869