Why the Burden of Proving Causation Should Shift to the Defendant Under the New Federal Trade Secrets Act
Vol: 13, Issue: 1, Page: 1
2016
- 1,468Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage1,468
- Downloads1,195
- 1,195
- Abstract Views273
Article Description
For years courts in trade secret misappropriation cases have filled up a graveyard with claims that did not account for every possible alternative cause of the Plaintiff’s losses. The result is perverse: the more disruptive the Defendant’s misappropriation, the less likely the Plaintiff will be able to show the jury a clear picture of what happened and prove “but for” causation. But the new federal law frees courts from those cases and from the state misappropriation statutes that produced them. What is needed now is a shift in thinking, and a shift in a burden.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know