In the case of your Coke vs. Pepsi scenario, would the recipe for Coke not be protected both as a trade secret, and under copyright?

On the other hand, I can't believe it'd be against the law for some employees from Coke to quit and start a company that manufactures soda (assuming they didn't actually use Coke's recipe).

For 'eternal' products like Coke I guess it's impossible, but for other still moving markets I thought a simple N-years NDA clause was enough to let ex-employee not screw you until you have enough head start.

sandworm101: That's a really interesting comment. It sounds very anti free market to me, but I guess I'm not surprised. I guess the only recourse for a founder led company in that situation would be to leave the US. Not necessarily a great result.

OT: Regarding the Coke/Pepsi thing, personally I think food manufacturers (I use the term loosely) should be forced to disclose what's in their products. Though I would strongly agree that this comment has nothing to do with the rest of our previous discussion.

Leaving the US would do little beyond increasing the cost of litigation and making said founder look more like a fugitive. Tradesecret law and IP law generally is pretty universal. And you can still get sued where the alleged theft/taking/wrong took place. A default decision (ie you don't show up) by a US court will be enforced in Canada, Europe or most anywhere else.

As for free markets, while IP law does create monopolies, the theory is that many protected innovations would never be brought to market without some promise they won't be replicated.

For below: Independent creation is not theft and so the laws do not apply. Copyright and patent bar independent creation, but not tradesecret. No doubt countless production secrets have been independently developed by competitors. When one trys to patent something, these come out of the woodwork as "prior art". But independence is a very hard burden to prove. Any communication from one firm to another, especially the movie a knowledgeable employee from one firm to the other, destroys any notion of independence.

It sounds like you agree with me then. Techniques developed for employer A CAN be taken to employer B. [as long as they are independently created ]

If there is some nuance here that I'm missing, I'd like to know what it is. A finer understanding of this point is probably really important for anyone who works in science.

No they cannot be 'taken' from A to B. They must arise independently within in B. The fact B's technique looks very much like A's must be complete coincidence.

> A default decision (ie you don't show up) by a US court will be enforced in Canada, Europe or most anywhere else.

Russia and China will be more than happy to take your IP :)

sandworm101: do you think those laws apply when someone reinvents something that was in their head, or only when documents were retained/copied/passed as in the Chung/Boeing case?

What laws?