Can American companies still practice safe searches?

Leonard M. Fuld
{"title":"Can American companies still practice safe searches?","authors":"Leonard M. Fuld","doi":"10.1002/(SICI)1520-6386(199723)8:3<29::AID-CIR8>3.0.CO;2-L","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Although the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 greatly broadened the definition of “trade secrets” whose misappropriation can trigger criminal penalties, businesses still must keep abreast of the capabilities, vulnerabilities, and intentions of their rivals if they are to remain competitive. Fortunately, the Act does not, in fact, hamstring aggressive intelligence gathering—as long as CI professionals recognize the legal boundaries and apply common sense when in the field. Smart analysis of available data, after all, remains fair game. To navigate gray areas, identify yourself when soliciting information. Be wary of specialized information from suppliers, joint-venture partners, new employees, or job candidates that may legally belong to a competitor. If you know the target company is treating information as confidential, don't ask for it. Observe basic safe-search limits, and you can remain an aggressive competitor. © 1997 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc.</p>","PeriodicalId":100295,"journal":{"name":"Competitive Intelligence Review","volume":"8 3","pages":"29-31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6386(199723)8:3<29::AID-CIR8>3.0.CO;2-L","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Competitive Intelligence Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/%28SICI%291520-6386%28199723%298%3A3%3C29%3A%3AAID-CIR8%3E3.0.CO%3B2-L","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Although the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 greatly broadened the definition of “trade secrets” whose misappropriation can trigger criminal penalties, businesses still must keep abreast of the capabilities, vulnerabilities, and intentions of their rivals if they are to remain competitive. Fortunately, the Act does not, in fact, hamstring aggressive intelligence gathering—as long as CI professionals recognize the legal boundaries and apply common sense when in the field. Smart analysis of available data, after all, remains fair game. To navigate gray areas, identify yourself when soliciting information. Be wary of specialized information from suppliers, joint-venture partners, new employees, or job candidates that may legally belong to a competitor. If you know the target company is treating information as confidential, don't ask for it. Observe basic safe-search limits, and you can remain an aggressive competitor. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

美国公司还能实行安全搜查吗?
尽管1996年的《经济间谍法》极大地扩大了“商业秘密”的定义,挪用商业秘密可能会引发刑事处罚,但如果企业要保持竞争力,就必须了解竞争对手的能力、弱点和意图。幸运的是,事实上,该法案并没有阻碍积极的情报收集——只要CI专业人员认识到法律界限,并在实地应用常识。毕竟,对现有数据进行明智的分析仍然是公平的。要浏览灰色区域,请在征求信息时表明自己的身份。警惕来自供应商、合资伙伴、新员工或求职者的专业信息,这些信息可能合法属于竞争对手。如果你知道目标公司将信息视为机密,不要索要。遵守基本的安全搜索限制,你可以继续成为一个积极的竞争对手。©1997 John Wiley&;股份有限公司。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信