In a previous post I provided an overview of the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016. But what is a trade secret?
Trade secrets, together with patents, trademarks, and copyrights, are one of the four main types of intellectual property. Unlike the three other types of IP, trade secrets are never made public. Trademarks and service marks are obtainable only through public use that creates an association between the mark and the origin of specific goods or services in the minds of the consumer. Copyrights are generally agnostic to publicity, but most copyrighted material is shown publicly in some form. While public disclosure before filing a patent application can destroy your patent rights, if your patent application is allowed it will always be made public. Public disclosure of your trade secret will destroy it – they’re like vampires, they live in the shadows and any exposure to light will kill them.
So how do these four different types of intellectual property interact? Let’s look at KFC as a case study. Many people around the world are familiar with the initials ‘K-F-C’ and the character Colonel Harland Sanders. The initials ‘K-F-C’ and the image of Colonel Sanders are both trademarks registered by KFC Corporation with the USPTO. These are classic trademarks – most consumers know and associate KFC® and the Colonel Sanders character with the chain of friend chicken restaurants owned by Yum! Brands.
KFC also owns numerous copyrights. While the general concept of ‘The Colonel’ and his likeness are protected by trademark, specific drawings of Colonel Sanders, the television ads in which the character appears, and even photographs of the actual Col. Harland Sanders, are all protected by copyrights.
KFC’s trademarks and copyrights are all associated with the branding and marketing of the restaurants. But what about the product?
The KFC chicken is the product of two major components: the coating of the chicken and the conditions under which the chicken is cooked. On September 26, 1962, Col. Harland Sanders filed a patent application for “[p]rocess of producing fried chicken under pressure.” That application eventually became U.S. Patent No. 3,245,800. In the ‘800 Patent, Col. Sanders claimed a process of making fried chicken involving “coating said [chicken] with a moist layer of breading material” and cooking the breaded chicken in hot fat under pressure. It took 3 ½ years to issue, but when the patent issued the specific process Col. Sanders used to make his famous chicken was made available for the entire world to study. This is the trade-off with patents, you receive a 20 year legal monopoly on the patented invention, but in exchange you are required to disclose everything you know about the invention (35 U.S.C. § 112(a)).
Notice that Col. Sanders did not include the specific composition of the “moist layer of breading material” in his patent. The “moist layer of breading material” is obviously Col. Sander’s famous ‘original recipe of 11 herbs and spices,’ allegedly written down only on a single piece of paper by Col. Sanders himself and known to only a select few people. The trade secret made Col. Sanders a very wealthy person. By not patenting the specific ‘original recipe,’ Colonel Sanders prevented public disclosure of the exact recipe and was able to charge restaurants a fee to send pre-made “breading material” to use on their own chicken (he also required them to state it was original recipe).
Patenting the ‘original recipe’ would have disclosed the formula to the world, allowing competitors to attempt to recreate the recipe and flavor without infringing the patent (a/k/a reverse engineering and engineering around) and that patent protection would have expired decades ago. Instead, Col. Sanders chose to patent the process of making the chicken while protecting the recipe as a trade secret. Col. Sanders thus had a method of enforcement (the patent) to initially squelch competition, plus something to sell to others (the pre-mixed breading) to make money and build his brand, while reserving the trade secret (and arguably most important aspect of his product) to continue to build the brand once the patent protection expired.
When used properly, trade secrets can be the most valuable part of your IP portfolio.
Related Posts
Search Blog
Follow Us
Recent Posts
- Construction Contractors Should Prepare for the Effects of Potential New Tariffs on Construction Material Prices and Availability
- Federal Court Strikes Down the DOL’s Increased Salary Thresholds for Executive, Administrative, Professional, And Highly Compensated Employee Overtime Exemptions
- Breaking News: FinCEN Postpones Beneficial Ownership Reporting Deadlines for Companies Impacted by Recent Major Storms
- What You Need to Know About the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Build America TIFIA Loan
- Breaking News: Federal Judge Blocks Nationwide Implementation of the FTC’s New Rule Banning Noncompete Agreements
- September 4th is Almost Here: How Employers Can Prepare for the Upcoming Effective Date of the FTC’s Non-Compete Rule
- Florida’s New Statutory Home Warranty: What Home Builders Need to Know
- Orange County Proposes Temporary Suspension Ordinance on New Development Applications
- Raising the Roof: The U.S. Department of Labor Announces Rule Raising Salary Thresholds for Overtime Exemptions
- New Guidelines Anticipated Following HHS’s Health Cybersecurity Concept Paper
Popular Categories
- Construction
- Construction Litigation
- Employment and Labor
- Litigation (Labor & Employment)
- Construction
- Business of Real Estate
- Landlord-Tenant
- Department of Labor
- Real Estate Law
- Competition
- Cybersecurity
- Intellectual Property
- Salary
- Appeals
- Contracts
- Litigation
- Trusts and Estates
- Data Security
- Business
- Supreme Court
- Development/Land Use
- Public Private Partnership
- IP Litigation
- Technology
- Privacy
- Patents
- Litigation (Appellate)
- Business
- Public Finance
- Regulatory Compliance
- Florida Government Contracts
- Foreclosures
- Trademark
- Contracting
- Health Care
- Financial Institutions
- Compliance
- Estate planning
- International Dispute Resolution
- Florida Public Contracts
- Government Contracting
- Government Contracts
- Property Tax
- Government
- Lease
- Conveyances
- Appellate Blog
- Patent Office
- Insurance
- Wealth planning
- Federal Government Contracting
- Florida Bid Protests
- Public Contracts
- Infringement
- Cyber fraud
- Proposal Writing
- Public Bidding
- GAO
- Bid Protest
- International Arbitration and Litigation
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Arbitration
- International
- Restrictive Covenants
- Grant Writing
- Copyright
- Promissory Notes
- Title
- Small Business
- Florida Procurement
- Public procurement
- PTAB
- General Liability
- Technology
- Consumer Privacy
- International Arbitration
- Liens and encumbrances
- Liens
- Creditor's Rights
- Bidding
- Attorneys' Fees
- Inter Partes Review
- Consumer Protection
- Regulation
- Venue
- Power Generation
- Contracting
- Government Vendor
- State Government Contracts
- Ad Valorem Assessments
- Florida Administrative Law
- Attorneys' Fees
- Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure
- Bankruptcy
- Florida Public Procurement
- Russia-Related Arbitration
- Mortgages
- Record on Appeal
- FINRA
- Rehearing
- Eviction
- Loan guaranties
- Patents - Assignor Estoppel
- Statute of limitations
- Statute of repose
- Dispute Resolution
- Liens
- Damages
- Maritime
- Briefing
- Request for Proposal
- Patents - Obviousness
- Commercial Brokerage
- Trade Secrets
- Bid Writing
- Florida Bidding Strategies
- Renewal
- Attorneys' Fees
- Florida County Lands
- Florida Economic Incentive Packages
- Jury Instructions
- Design Professionals
- Stay
- Certiorari
- email hacking
- Forum Selection
- Offers of Judgment
- Prevailing Party
- Settlements
- Assignment of Contract
- Assignment of Proceeds
- Lis Pendens
- Appellate Jurisdiction - Deadlines
- Banking
- Designer Liability
- Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure
- Finality
- Fintech
- Marketing/Advertising
- Unlicensed Contracting
- Evidence
- Evidence
- Expert
- Expert Science
- Federal Supply Schedule
- Florida Public Records Law
- Mootness
- Preservation
- Socio-Economic Programs
- Sunshine Law
- Veteran Owned Business
- Homestead
- Partnerships and LLCs
- Standing
Editors
- Of Counsel
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Senior Associate
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Senior Associate
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Of Counsel
- Senior Associate
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
Archives
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- February 2024
- November 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- October 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016