Stalk Case Study

Illinois courts have stated that secrecy is the most important requirement for information to qualify as a trade secret. Sys. Dev. Servs., Inc. v. Haarmann, 907 N.E.2d 63, 73 (2009) (citing Pope v. Alberto–Culver Co., 694 N.E.2d 615, 617 (1998)). In determining whether LawTalk is a secret, a court will examine the extent to which LawTalk is known outside of CFJ's business and the ease with which others could duplicate it. The following sub-sections examine these requirements.
1. LawTalk is not known outside of CFJ’s business because its overall organization is unique and knowledge about its existence is restricted to key personnel within CFJ.

Information made from a combination of publicly known elements can be sufficiently secret when its organization is unique and not disclosed to outsiders. George S. May Int'l Co. v. Int'l Profit Associates, 628 N.E.2d 647, 654 (1993); Computer Assocs. Int’l v. Quest Software, Inc., 333 F. Supp. 2d 688 at 700 (stating that a unique combination of software source code could be a trade secret even if it contained publicly known elements). In George, a former employer sought preliminary injunction against former employees from using a unique system of analyzing business operation in another
Stampede Tool Warehouse, Inc. v. May, 651 N.E.2d 209, 211 (1995). In Stampede, the plaintiff, an automotive tools and equipment distributor, brought a misappropriation action against its former employees. Id. at 209. The plaintiff alleged that knowledge about its customer list was limited to the corporation’s president, general manager, and a few others on a need-to-know basis. Id. at 211-15. The court held that plaintiff’s customer list constituted a secret. Id. at 216. The court explained that this information must be protected as a trade secret because it was not available from any public source.