The Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016: What Business Owners Need to Know
Intellectual Property Update
Hinshaw Alert | 2 min read
May 16, 2016
On May 11, 2016, President Obama signed into law the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) of 2016. It became effective immediately.
The DTSA — which amends the Economic Espionage Act (18 U.S.C. § 1831) — establishes a federal trade secrets law that can be enforced in federal court. Owners of trade secrets or confidential information used or intended to be used in interstate or foreign commerce can pursue a variety of civil remedies in federal court. Claims must be filed within three years from the time that the misappropriation was discovered or should have been discovered.
New Remedies
One of the most controversial of the new remedies is ex parte seizure. An aggrieved party can petition the court to order law enforcement officials to seize, ex parte, only under extraordinary circumstances, any property "necessary to prevent the propagation or dissemination of the trade secret." Other remedies include damages, injunctive relief (or reasonable royalty damages if an injunction is inequitable), and punitive damages of up to twice the amount of actual damages awarded. Trade secret misappropriation occurring outside the United States by a U.S. citizen or corporation is also covered by the new law.
Safe Harbor Permits Employees to Disclose Employer's Trade Secrets to Governments
The DTSA also includes complicated safe harbor provisions applicable to both federal and state law, permitting employees and other individuals to disclose the employer's trade secrets: (1) to a federal, state or local government to investigate a suspected violation of law; and (2) in a lawsuit filing under seal which may be in an employee-filed anti-retaliation lawsuit. The safe harbor provisions grant both criminal and civil immunity for such activity.
Employers should notify employees in any new or updated contract that is related to trade secrets or confidential information of their rights under the safe harbor provisions. This notice should be in writing. Employers who pursue a theft of trade secrets claim will not be able to recover attorneys' fees or exemplary damages against an employee to whom such notice was not provided. Businesses should also consider including the required notice in confidentiality agreements with independent contractors, vendors and other business associates. Employer disclosure of trade secrets preferably should be made to employees and contractors only on a need to know basis and only when suitable nondisclosure agreements are in place prior to any disclosure.
Takeaways
Given the increasing amount of trade secret theft, this new law provides a welcome new federal civil cause of action and substantial additional remedies over prior laws, even where the wrongful activity occurs outside the United States. Employers should provide written notice to employees and contractors of the safe harbor provisions in new and updated agreements. Employers who suspect that current or former employees, consultants or competitors have misappropriated trade secrets for use in other businesses or with foreign nationals should evaluate their potential claims under this new law.
Related Capabilities
Featured Insights

Employment Law Observer
Aug 10, 2026
As Leaves Fall, Leave Requests Rise: Are You Compliant With Chicago’s Expanded Rules?

Press Release
Aug 7, 2026
Daniel McGrath Re-Elected Senior Director of the Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel

Insights for Insurers Alert
Aug 7, 2026
California Supreme Court Clarifies Pleading Standards for Excess Policy Claims

Press Release
Aug 6, 2026
Charles Townsend Named a Best Mentor Finalist in the 2026 ALM Texas Legal Awards

Webinar
Aug 5, 2026
April Toy Moderates HNBA Webinar on AI in the Practice of Law

Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert
Aug 5, 2026
2026 AI Compliance: Upcoming Laws Every Organization Needs to Know

Press Release
July 21, 2026 | Updated on August 4, 2026
Three Hinshaw Attorneys Named to the 2026 National Black Lawyers’ Top 40 Under 40 List

Healthcare Alert
Aug 3, 2026
Fixing the Emergency Refill Trap: What California’s AB 1587 Means for Pharmacies

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Jul 30, 2026
Should Text Messages be Considered “Calls” Under the TCPA? The Seventh Circuit Says No

Healthcare Alert
Jul 30, 2026
California Courts Sharply Curtail the MICRA Damages Cap in Nursing Home Litigation

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 30, 2026
Analyzing a Couple of Cases Involving Exclusions in D&O Policies

