My WordPress Blog

Texas Theft Liability Act – Providing Civil Remedies for Criminal Theft of Trade Secrets

Texas Theft Liability Act – Providing Civil Remedies for Criminal Theft of Trade Secrets

The Texas Theft Liability Act (TTLA) was authorized in 1989. See Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code § 134.001. The TTLA was presented on the grounds that, in spite of the fact that burglary was condemned under the Penal Code, there were no arrangements for common risk of robbery. Advisory group Report on S.B. 269 p.2.; Cooper v. Sony Music Entertainment, Inc., 2002 U.S. Dist. Lexis 3832, *16 (S.D. Tex. February 22, 2002) (“[T]he Texas Penal Code doesn’t give a private right of action.”); Aguilar v. Chastain, 923 S.W.2d 740, 745 (Tex. Application. Tyler 1996) (writ denied) (“[T]he Penal Code doesn’t make private reasons for activity, and a casualty “doesn’t have remaining to partake as a gathering in a criminal continuing.”) This was especially valid for proprietary innovations, despite the fact that proprietary advantages are by and large viewed as rights in the idea of property rights. The solitary way a gathering could look to authorize those rights before the entry of the TTLA was through misdeed or agreement standards. IBP, Inc. v. Klumpe, 07-00-0221-CV, 2001 WL 1456173, 7 (Tex. Application. Amarillo 2001). In this manner, the assembly tried to give legal common obligation to, among different offenses, unlawful appointment of licensed innovation – proprietary advantages. On the side of entry of the demonstration, State Senator McFarland noted in board that, “legal common risk [will] take into consideration financial recuperation by the casualty against the guilty party, and in this manner supplement the criminal assents.” Id.


Under the TTLA, “an individual who submits robbery is at risk for the harms coming about because of the burglary.” Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code § 134.003(a). Also, “a parent or other individual who has the obligation of control and sensible order of a kid is subject for burglary submitted by the youngster.” Id. at § 134.003(b). Robbery under the TTLA is characterized as the “unlawfully appropriating property or unlawfully getting administrations as depicted… ” in Sections 31.1-7, 11-14 of the Texas Penal Code. Id. at § 134.002(2) incorporates Sections 31.03, 31.04, 31.05, 31.06, 31.07, 31.11, 31.12, 31.13, or 31.14 of the Penal Code as covered kinds of robbery. These areas characterize a few unique activities that comprise burglary, remembering the robbery of proprietary advantages for Section 31.05.


Under Texas Penal Code § 31.05(a), a proprietary advantage is “the entire or any piece of any logical or specialized data, plan, measure, system, recipe, or improvement that has esteem and that the proprietor has taken measures to keep from opening up to people other than those chose by the proprietor to approach for restricted purposes.” Id. at § 31.05(a)(4). Visit :- กลุ่มลับ


An individual is blameworthy of taking a proprietary advantage when he “purposely (1) takes a proprietary innovation, (2) makes a duplicate of an article speaking to a proprietary innovation, or (3) conveys or sends a proprietary innovation.” Id. at § 31.05(b). All together for a litigant to be at risk under § 31.05, he probably taken proprietary advantages “without the proprietor’s successful assent.” Id. This is characterized in § 31.01(3) as:


Leave a Comment