Learning Team Reflection Essay Example for Free

Learning Team reflection factor EssayWith the advancement of technology and the rise in Internet usage amongst individual companies, businesses, and organizations, they are set about with new challenges in protecting their brand, trademark, and image from competitors (Clark, 2007). This has caused many businesses to take action in the protection of idea property rights or IPR. For the week three assignment, the members of team A choose to discuss the case in which chancellor Technologies wins intellectual property lawsuit. This paper would highlight details of the case. Doug Sayer, the owner of post-mortem Technologies, claimed that two of his reason employees stole private information for trade secret infringement and future sabotage. The former men were members of slide by management at premiere Technologies. Orr and Schutte, the two men, downloaded the organizations insider information to external hard drivers, and shortly after that, left(a) the organization to work f or the competitor.According to Legal information Institute, softwood Secret is defined as the information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process that derives independent economic value or potential, from not being generally cognise to or readily ascertainable through appropriate means by other persons who might win economic value from its disclosure or use. The issue is that Orr and Schutte had an intentional plan to use the operations of Premier Technologies against them to make the organization fall into the red and sale for a price less than what the business is worth.In Bannock County, Idahos Sixth Judicial District in December 2011 ruled in favor of Premier Technologies in the lawsuit Premier Technologies v. Chadd Orr, Jeff Schutte and Petersen, Inc. Doug Sayer, overly Premier Technologys president and chief operating officer, argued that Chadd Orr and Jeff Schutte was conspiring with Peterson. This made Orr and Schutte br from each one their fiducial duties that they owed to Premier Technology while they were high level managers at Premier Technologies. The jury unanimously voted in favor of Premier Technologies and agreed that both Orr and Schutte violated the Idaho Trade Secret Act, and that they both had a fiduciary relationship withPremier. The jury also ruled in favor of Premier, implicating Petersen Inc. had, in fact, conspired with Orr and Schutte in breaching of their fiduciary accountability to Premier Technologies. The ruling awarded a little over two million dollars to Premier Technologies. A $905,250 judicial decision was set against Schutte, while a $603,500 judgment against Orr was set for breaching their fiduciary duties. Punitive damages were awarded as such $172,000 against Schutte and $120,000 against Orr.The analysis of the case appears to be quite simple in nature. The courts decision ultimately stems from Orr and Schuttes fiduciary responsibilities that they owed to Premier during their employment with the lodge. The copy of protected data was not in itself the infraction, but when that information was subsequently provided to a direct competitor, an illegal activity had taken place and the two men were liable for their actions. The state laws of Idaho intelligibly protected Premier, and any business entity, from this form of intellectual property theft. It also awards that company money to take on the damages that were caused by these actions, and because of the intentional nature of the act, punitive damages were made possible as well.As there are often no formal means to protect the trade secrets that a company might have in their processes, litigation is sometimes the best option and, in this case, it certainly provided Premier with the chance to recoup their losses. As a future employee hiring procedure, it might be pertinent for Sayer to include an employee clause that gives up their right to work for a direct competitor in the future, as som e highly competitive organizations do (Idaho State Journal).Through many trials and errors, laws have come to pass to protect each business from employees who wish to harm them. Orr and Schutte not only jeopardized Premier Technologys operation, but they also jeopardized their integrity. Once they decided to work with a competitor, they stole valuable information from the Plaintiff in army to make the business fail. Their actions turned into a lawsuit that determined they breached their contract with Premier Technologies. Due to this infringement, both parties and competitor were liable for all damages incurred to Premier Technologies. For Premier Technologies to prevent this from happening again, they shoulddetermine if a clause is needed to prevent employees from working with the competitor.ReferenceClark, D. (2007). EBusiness and Intellectual Property. IBB Solicitors. Retrieved from http//www.ibblaw.co.uk/downloads/brochures/2010-05-27-15-05-41-ebusiness_and_intellectual_propert y.pdfLegal Information Institute, August 2010, Trade Secret. Cornell University law school.http//www.law.cornell.edu/wex/trade_secret