Proprietary information: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(12 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|confi|}}''For a rumination our habit to wilfully confuse a dull public utility with proprietary information see [[secret sauce]]''.
{{a|confi|}}''For a rumination our habit to wilfully confuse a dull public utility with proprietary information see [[secret sauce]]''.


Careful, trooper. It is fun to throw around big words, but be aware of what they mean.
{{d|Proprietary information |/prəˈpraɪətəriˌɪnfəˈmeɪʃən/|n|}}


“[[Proprietary]]”, so our good friends on the world wide web tell us,<ref>{{Google2|define|proprietary}}</ref> means “of or relating to an [[owner]] or [[ownership]].  
Information that is ''capable'' of ownership and that is owned. [[Intellectual property]].


Ownership implies a [[property]] right of some sort.<ref>{{Google2|define|property}}: the right to the possession, use, or disposal of something; ''[[ownership]]''.</ref> When it comes to [[information]], “ownership” is a slippery concept. Only certain kinds of information may be “owned” at all— those that qualify as [[intellectual property]]: [[copyright]]ed material; [[patent]]s and [[trade mark]]s. But permissions to use, or transfer, ''proprietary rights'' in information are ''not'' a fit subject for a [[confidentiality agreement]]. For those you need a licence agreement. An [[NDA]] is about what you may ''not'' do with information to which you already have an implied licence. This is a contractual restriction: its breach sounds in damages, for loss caused to the discloser. The use, for profit, of information owned by someone else is not, of itself, a breach of contract but an infringement of proprietary rights for which the remedy is an account for profits. 
Careful, trooper. It is fun to throw around big words, but be aware of what they mean. [[Proprietary]], so our good friends on the world wide web tell us, means “of or relating to an [[owner]] or [[ownership]].  


''You can’t own raw data, or facts, or simple lists of things''. Client lists, trading data, a credit history, the economic data from your business — these things may be commercially sensitive, and they may be secret — but ''they are not [[proprietary information]]''.  
Ownership implies a [[property]] right of some sort.<ref>Quoth [[Google]]: “The right to the possession, use, or disposal of something; ''[[ownership]]''.”</ref> When it comes to [[information]], “ownership” is a slippery concept. Only certain kinds of information may be “owned” at all— those that qualify as [[intellectual property]]: [[copyright]]ed material; [[patent]]s and [[trade mark]]s. But permissions to use, or transfer, ''proprietary rights'' in information are ''not'' a fit subject for a [[confidentiality agreement]]. For those you need a licence agreement. An [[NDA]] is about what you may ''not'' do with information to which you already have an implied licence. This is a contractual restriction: its breach sounds in damages, for loss caused to the discloser. The use, for profit, of information owned by someone else is not, of itself, a breach of contract but an infringement of proprietary rights for which the remedy is an account for profits.


Much of the [[Confidential information - Confi Provision|information]] you might want to protect in a [[Confidentiality agreement|confidentiality agreement]] is ''not'' intellectual property: Indeed, often that is exactly why you need a [[confi]] — the secret is not otherwise protected. If it is not intellectual property then it cannot be “[[proprietary information]]”
''You can’t “own” raw data, or facts, or simple lists of things''. Client lists, trading data, a credit history, the economic data from your business — these things may be commercially sensitive, and they may be secret — but ''they are not [[proprietary information]]''.
 
Thus the scope of a [[confidentiality agreement]] is wider than an [[intellectual property]] [[licence]], but the measure of compensation is different.
 
Much of the [[Confidential information - Confi Provision|information]] you might want to protect in a [[Confidentiality agreement|confidentiality agreement]] is ''not'' intellectual property: Indeed, often that is exactly why you need a [[confi]] — the secret is not otherwise protected. If it is not intellectual property then it cannot be “[[proprietary information]]”.


{{sa}}
{{sa}}
*{{confiprov|Confidential information}}
*{{confiprov|Confidential information}}
*[[OneNDA]]
*[[OneNDA]]
*[[Cultural appropriation]]
{{ref}}
{{ref}}
{{c|Design}}
{{c|Design}}