A creative product or invention that has the sole right to use it belongs to its designated owner and is known as intellectual property. The owner gains from having intellectual property, which is categorized as an intangible asset. Patents, copyrights, logos, and trade secrets are a few examples of the various forms of intellectual property. A non-disclosure agreement is a compact between two parties that forbids the disclosure of specific, confidential information. A tort is an action that results in harm or loss to a third entity. Civil responsibility results from it. In this scenario, the type of intellectual property is a trade secret. A trade secret is any information used by a business in its operations, whereby such information derives value for the business by being secret. The client list is a trade secret that belongs to ABC Paper Corp. This means that ABC Paper Corp benefits from exclusive use of the client list which gives it a competitive edge over its competitors (Kingsbury, 2012).
Even though Sam created the client list, the ownership of the client list is with ABC Paper Corp. This is because it was created under the employment contract between him and ABC Paper Corp. Furthermore, Sam signs a non-disclosure agreement not to disclose such information which makes it privileged information to ABC Paper Corp only. The company benefits by exclusively using the client list which makes it a trade secret (Garton, 2014).
Sam’s actions are unethical for conspiring to provide confidential information that belongs to ABC Paper Corp to XYZ Paper Co. There is breach of trust when Sam agrees to disclose the client list to a third party. His employer has entrusted him with confidential company information, and he has even signed a non-disclosure agreement but agrees to give it out to a third party anyway.
There is lack of integrity on the part of Sam for agreeing to disclose privileged information for him to get employed by XYZ Paper Co. He breaches confidentiality to get a reward from a third party in the form of a new employment contract. In doing so, he demonstrates a lack of ethics. He compromises the moral principle of integrity by betraying ABC Paper Corp for personal benefit.
Sam committed a tort of negligence by shoving Natalie aside which makes her fall hitting her head to the door knob and suffering a concussion. A tort is an action that causes injury to another person or property leading to a civil legal liability (Atchuthen, Singh, 2009). In this case, it was an unintended tort. Sam causes injury to Natalie, and she suffers a concussion. Sam did not intend to harm Natalie which makes this a tort of negligence.
All the elements of a tort of negligence are present in this case. First, there is a duty of care. Sam should exercise a duty of care towards Natalie. He has an obligation to use ordinary care when he is around other people.Secondly, there is a breach of duty of care. Sam shoves Natalie to the side whereby she suffers an injury. Third, Sam causes an injury to Natalie, and she suffers a concussion. His irresponsible actions bring injury to Natalie. Finally,Natalie suffers a loss when she gets injured as a result of Sam's actions. Therefore, all the merits of a tort of negligence are in this case (Atchuthen, Singh, 2009).
Sam can be held criminally liable for theft of information from ABC Paper Corp. The action of downloading the client list into an external flash drive in an unauthorized manner is tantamount to theft. The information is downloaded from the company's computer for use by a third party. It is taken forcibly as Sam even pushes Natalie aside to get away. Sam can therefore be criminally charged with theft by ABC Paper Corp.
However, the breach of the non-disclosure agreement between him and ABC Paper Corp is a civil wrong, rather than a criminal offense. The company can therefore sue Sam for damages caused by breach of the non-disclosure agreement. Sam is liable to pay for the loss to ABC Paper Corp caused by him disclosing the client list to XYX Paper Co.
The injury to Natalie is a tort of negligence rather than a criminal offense. Natalie can sue for damages for the loss incurred from her getting injured (Atchuthen, Singh, 2009). The case lacks the merit of a criminal offense in the sense that the injury caused by Sam was unintended. Sam actions were negligent rather than criminal. The injury was not something that Sam premeditated. Sam is liable to the extent of compensating Natalie for the loss to her caused by her state and for any treatment for the concussion. The damages are to restore Natalie to her initial state rather than to punish Sam. Criminal liability entails punishing of the aggressor, whereas civil liability entails restoring the plaintiff to their original state.
Conclusion
As discussed in this paper, Sam demonstrates lack of ethics for breaching trust and compromising his integrity to disclose a trade secret to a third party to gain favor in the form of employment by XYZ Paper Co. He is also criminally liable for theft of company information. There is also civil liability in two ways: first, the breach of the nondisclosure agreement, second, for the tort of negligence when he shoves Natalie to the side causing a physical injury to her.
References
Kingsbury, A. (2012). Intellectual property. Wellington, N.Z.: LexisNexis NZ.
Atchuthen Pillai, P., & Singh, A. (2009). Law of tort. Lucknow: Eastern Book Company.
Garton, R. (2014). Trade Secrets. Open Road Media Mystery & Thriller.
