Life, Liberty, and Trade Secrets: Intellectual Property in the Criminal Justice System
Life, Liberty, and Trade Secrets: Intellectual Property in the Criminal Justice System
复制标题
生命、自由和商业秘密：刑事司法系统中的知识产权
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Rebecca Wexler
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Rebecca Wexler
刑事司法系统正在自动化。在每个阶段，从警务到证据再到假释，机器学习和其他计算机系统都会指导结果。关于这些技术的利弊的广泛辩论忽略了一个关键问题：所有权。开发人员经常声称他们的工具如何工作的细节是商业机密，并拒绝向刑事被告或他们的律师透露这些信息。将知识产权权利要求引入刑事司法系统，引发了生命、自由和财产利益之间理论上的紧张关系。本文首次对刑事案件中的商业秘密证据进行了广泛的描述，并制定了一个框架来解决由此产生的问题。与审判法院、立法机关和学者的普遍观点形成鲜明对比的是，本文认为商业秘密在刑事诉讼中不应享有特权。刑事商业秘密特权具有历史性、危害性和保护秘密保持器利益的不必要性。同时，相对于实体商业秘密法而言，商业秘密特权对知识产权的保护过度。此外，在刑事诉讼中公开商业秘密既不符合商业秘密法的理论目的，也不符合特权法的理论目的。商业秘密调查揭示了证据规则在民事和刑事案件中的不同功能。
The criminal justice system is becoming automated. At every stage, from policing to evidence to parole, machine learning and other computer systems guide outcomes. Widespread debates over the pros and cons of these technologies have overlooked a crucial issue: ownership. Developers often claim that details about how their tools work are trade secrets and refuse to disclose that information to criminal defendants or their attorneys. The introduction of intellectual property claims into the criminal justice system raises under-theorized tensions between life, liberty, and property interests. This Article offers the first wide-ranging account of trade secret evidence in criminal cases, and develops a framework to address the problems that result. In sharp contrast to the general view among trial courts, legislatures, and scholars alike, the Article argues that trade secrets should not be privileged in criminal proceedings. A criminal trade secret privilege is ahistorical; harmful to defendants; and unnecessary to protect the interests of the secret holder. Meanwhile, compared to substantive trade secret law, the privilege overprotects intellectual property. Further, privileging trade secrets in criminal proceedings fails to serve the theoretical purpose of either trade secret law or privilege law. The trade secret inquiry sheds new light on how evidence rules do, and should, function differently in civil and criminal cases.