PROTECTING TRADE SECRETS IN LITIGATION - THE IMPACT OF ARTICLE 9 OF THE EU TRADE SECRET DIRECTIVE ESPECIALLY ON FINNISH LAW

In November 2013 the European Commission issued the “Proposal for a Directive on the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure” (referred to as “TSD”). The TSD offers minimum harmonisation and aims at promoting sharing of knowledge, and the exploitation of innovations on the Internal Market. The European Parliament adopted the TSD on April 14, 2016 and the EU Member States will have two years to implement it. The TSD includes a harmonised definition of a trade secret that builds on the definition provided in Article 39 of the TRIPS Agreement. Moreover, it also ensures the freedom of expression and information and the protection of whistle-blowers. Appropriate means of actions and remedies against unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure of trade secrets are also included, such as provisional and pecuniary measures, injunctions and corrective measures or allocation of damages. This study examines the protection of trade secrets in the course of litigation regulated in Article 9 of the TSD. Currently, the protection of trade secrets within the EU is fragmented especially in this regard, which makes companies reluctant to resort to litigation when a trade secret has unlawfully been misappropriated or it is suspected that a trade secret is being misused. The regulations in Article 9 expand only to the hearing in court. Such protection is welcomed and a step in the right direction. However, in my study I have found that in order for the protection to be sufficient there is a need to further establish measures to protect trade secrets during the entire process, from the filing of the claim to the end when the judgement is given. Consequently, I also discuss different measures that could be used to strengthen the protection of trade secrets before the hearing in court, as evidence are gathered.

Protecting Trade Secrets In Litigation The Impact of Article 9 of The EU Trade Secret Directive Especially on Finnish Law

In November 2013 the European Commission issued the “Proposal for a Directive on the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure” (referred to as “TSD”). The TSD offers minimum harmonisation and aims at promoting sharing of knowledge, and the exploitation of innovations on the Internal Market. The European Parliament adopted the TSD on April 14, 2016 and the EU Member States will have two years to implement it. The TSD includes a harmonised definition of a trade secret that builds on the definition provided in Article 39 of the TRIPS Agreement. Moreover, it also ensures the freedom of expression and information and the protection of whistle-blowers. Appropriate means of actions and remedies against unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure of trade secrets are also included, such as provisional and pecuniary measures, injunctions and corrective measures or allocation of damages. This study examines the protection of trade secrets in the course of litigation regulated in Article 9 of the TSD. Currently, the protection of trade secrets within the EU is fragmented especially in this regard, which makes companies reluctant to resort to litigation when a trade secret has unlawfully been misappropriated or it is suspected that a trade secret is being misused. The regulations in Article 9 expand only to the hearing in court. Such protection is welcomed and a step in the right direction. However, in my study I have found that in order for the protection to be sufficient there is a need to further establish measures to protect trade secrets during the entire process, from the filing of the claim to the end when the judgement is given. Consequently, I also discuss different measures that could be used to strengthen the protection of trade secrets before the hearing in court, as evidence are gathered.

Many valued algebraic structures as measures of comparison

This thesis studies the properties and usability of operators called t-norms, t-conorms, uninorms, as well as many valued implications and equivalences. Into these operators, weights and a generalized mean are embedded for aggregation, and they are used for comparison tasks and for this reason they are referred to as comparison measures. The thesis illustrates how these operators can be weighted with a differential evolution and aggregated with a generalized mean, and the kinds of measures of comparison that can be achieved from this procedure. New operators suitable for comparison measures are suggested. These operators are combination measures based on the use of t-norms and t-conorms, the generalized 3_-uninorm and pseudo equivalence measures based on S-type implications. The empirical part of this thesis demonstrates how these new comparison measures work in the field of classification, for example, in the classification of medical data. The second application area is from the field of sports medicine and it represents an expert system for defining an athlete's aerobic and anaerobic thresholds. The core of this thesis offers definitions for comparison measures and illustrates that there is no actual difference in the results achieved in comparison tasks, by the use of comparison measures based on distance, versus comparison measures based on many valued logical structures. The approach has been highly practical in this thesis and all usage of the measures has been validated mainly by practical testing. In general, many different types of operators suitable for comparison tasks have been presented in fuzzy logic literature and there has been little or no experimental work with these operators.

Käyttövarmuusanalyysin tuottama tärkeysjärjestys elintarviketeollisuuden prosessilaitteille – Suuntaviivat kustannustietoisen kunnossapitostrategian luomiselle

Hallitsematon ja reaktiivinen kunnossapito on eräs tuotannon suurimpia kustannustekijöistä. Suunnitelmallisesti ja systemaattisesti johdettuna kunnossapito on tuotantotehokkuuden suurin vaikuttaja. Merkittävä osa tuotannon tehokkuuden ylläpidosta saavutetaan laitteiden käyttövarmuudella. Käyttövarmuuden saaminen hallintaan perustuu ennakoivan kunnossapidon määrän kasvattamiseen. Samalla korjaavan kunnossapidon kustannusriski laskee ja siihen käytetty panos vähenee. Huonolla kunnossapidon suunnitelmallisuudella on päinvastaiset vaikutukset. Tavoitteena on määritellä prosessilaitteiden käyttövarmuuksiin perustuva laitekriittisyys. Tutkimuksessa yhdistetään riskien arviointimenetelmiä, joilla keskimääräiset vikavälit ja seuraukset valmistukseen mallinnetaan. Kriittisyystekijöitä ovat käytettävyys, luotettavuus, kustannustekijät, turvallisuus ja ympäristövaikutukset. Tekijöiden arvottamiseen kehitettiin riksianalyysitaulukko. Kriittisyysluokat jaettiin kolmeen kategoriaan, joista A on kriittisin, B keskinkertainen ja C on matalin luokka. Lähtötietojen keräys toteutettiin triangulaatiomenetelmää soveltaen. Empiirisessä osassa HKScan Oy:n lihanjalostustehtaan jauheliha- ja kestomakkaraosastojen laitteet jaettiin A-, B- ja C-luokkiin. Kriittisimpiä laitteita oli 20 prosenttia analysoidusta laitemäärästä. Nämä A-luokkaan sijoitetut laitteet aiheuttavat 80 prosenttia kustannusriskeistä. B-luokkaan kuuluu 50 prosenttia ja C-luokkaan 30 prosenttia laitteista. Luokittelusta erotettiin havaitut turvallisuusriskit riskienhallinnan toimenpiteitä varten. Kustannustietoinen kriittisyysluokittelu on pohja kunnossapitostrategian rakentamiselle. Tämän avuksi esitettiin taulukot huolto-ohjelman luomiseen ja luokituksien hyödyntämiseen päivittäisessä toiminnassa.