The other requirement is whether LawTalk imparts economic value to both CFJ and its competitors. Illinois courts have stated that “the real value of a trade secret lies in the fact that it is not generally known to others who could benefit [from] using it.” Sys. Dev., 907 N.E.2d at 73 (citing Serv. Ctrs. of Chi. v. Minogue, 535 N.E.2d 1132, 1136 (1989)). In addition to secrecy of LawTalk, a court will examine the value of LawTalk to CFJ and its competitors as well as CFJ’s time and money investment in developing LawTalk. The following sub-sections analyze these factors.
1. CFJ has actual and potential competitive advantage over its competitors when LawTalk enabled it to reduce salary costs, decrease billable hours on research, increase its client base, and profits.
A party with a secret commercial information would be at a competitive advantage unless its competitors obtained that information. Strata,740 N.E.2d at 1175. In Strata, the plaintiff alleged that if Marketing Resources Plus, plaintiff's principal competitor, acquired its customer list, it would derive a significant competitive advantage over its software …show more content…
See Mangren Research & Dev. Corp. v. Nat'l Chem. Co., 87 F.3d 937, 942 (7th Cir. 1996). In Mangren, the plaintiff, a manufacturer of mold release agent brought a lawsuit against competitor companies who hired plaintiff’s former employees. Id. at 937. The plaintiff alleged that its mold release agent was more effective and cheaper than similar products in the market. Id. at 942. As a result, plaintiff’s sale increased for years until it significantly declined in 1990 when defendants marketed a competing product which the plaintiff alleged to be a misappropriated trade secret. Id. at 941. In this non-binding federal case law, the court held that the new product imparted considerable advantage for the plaintiff. Id. at
1. CFJ has actual and potential competitive advantage over its competitors when LawTalk enabled it to reduce salary costs, decrease billable hours on research, increase its client base, and profits.
A party with a secret commercial information would be at a competitive advantage unless its competitors obtained that information. Strata,740 N.E.2d at 1175. In Strata, the plaintiff alleged that if Marketing Resources Plus, plaintiff's principal competitor, acquired its customer list, it would derive a significant competitive advantage over its software …show more content…
See Mangren Research & Dev. Corp. v. Nat'l Chem. Co., 87 F.3d 937, 942 (7th Cir. 1996). In Mangren, the plaintiff, a manufacturer of mold release agent brought a lawsuit against competitor companies who hired plaintiff’s former employees. Id. at 937. The plaintiff alleged that its mold release agent was more effective and cheaper than similar products in the market. Id. at 942. As a result, plaintiff’s sale increased for years until it significantly declined in 1990 when defendants marketed a competing product which the plaintiff alleged to be a misappropriated trade secret. Id. at 941. In this non-binding federal case law, the court held that the new product imparted considerable advantage for the plaintiff. Id. at