Self-paced
P1
Often when a highly skilled and experienced employee leaves one company to work for another, there is the potential for a transfer of sensitive information between competitors. ███ █████ ██████████ ██ ████ █████ ██████ ███████████████ ███ █████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ████████████ ██████████████ ███████████ ████ ███ █████ █████████████ ███ █████ ██ ███████████ ██ ████ ███████ ██████████ ███ ██ ████ ████ ███ ██ █████ ██████████ ███
Problem ·
When employees change companies, they might take trade secrets with them
One principle - companies have right to their own intellectual property. Another principle - people can seek other employment and freely use their own abilities. These appear irreconcilable.
Courts' solution ·
Allow employees to change companies, but order employees not to disclose former employer's secrets
One critique ·
Court's solution doesn't protect employees' rights
Author's critique ·
Court's solution doesn't protect trade secrets
The transition "but it is also doubtful..." tells us that the author will focus on this critique. She won't focus on the other one.
P2
██ ██ █████████ ██████████ ██ ██████ ███████ ██ ████ ████ ██ █████ █████████ ████ ███ ███ ████████ ████ ██████ █████████ ███ ██████████ ████ ██ ████████ ███ ███ ███████████ ███████ ████ ███ ████ █████ ████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ████████ ████ ██ █████ █████ ████████████ █████████ █████████████ ██████ ███ ████ ███████████ ████ ██ ███ ██████ █████████ ███ ████████████ ██ ███████ ██ █████████ █████████ ██████ ██████████ ██████████ ███████ ███ █████████ █████████ ██ ███ ████████ █████ █████████ ███████████ █████████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ ████ ███ █████████ █████████
Support for Author's Critique ·
Employees can't separate expertise they gained from prior employment
However, companies might claim that part of that expertise involves intellectual property.
P3
████ ██ ████████ █████ █ ████████ ████ █ ███████████ ███ █████ ███████ ████ ████ ████ ████████ ██ ████ ████████ ███ ████████ ██████████ ███████ ███ ████████████ ████ ██ ████ █████ ███████████ ████ ██ █████████ ███ ████ ███ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ████████ ██████████ ██████████████ ███ █████████████████████ ████████ ██ █████ █████ █████████ ██ ███ ███ █████ ██ ██ ███ ████ █████ █████████████ ███ █████ ████ ██ █ █████ ████ ██████████████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ██ █████████ █████ ██ ████ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██████ ███
Support for Author's Critique ·
Court orders don't stop subsconscious use of trade secrets
Concession ·
Court orders, in theory, prohibit subconcious use of trade secrets ("leakage")
Author's response to concession ·
Hard to enforce prohibition against leakage
There won't be much evidence of subconscious use of secrets (because it's subconscious). And, it's hard to distinguish legitimate skill developed independently by employees from skill acquired through secrets.
Author's main point ·
Court orders prohibiting disclosure of secrets are unlikely to be effective
Passage Style
Critique or debate
Problem-analysis
2.
Given the passage's content and █████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██████████ █████ ████ ██████ ██ █████ █████████ ██ █ ████ ████ █████ ████ ███████ ██ ██ ████████
a
Given the law ██ ██ ███████ ████████████ █████████ █████ ██████████ █████ ███████ █████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ██████ █████ █████████ ██████ ██████████ ██ ████ ██ █████ ███████ █████
b
While difficult to ███████ ███ ██████████ ███████████ ███ ████████ ███ ████ █████████ █████ ██ ███████ ███ ███████████ ████████ ██ █████ ███████ █████ ██████████████ ██████████ ███ ██████ ██ ██████████
This goes against the general direction of the author’s main point, which is that injunctions are
c
Means of redress ████ ██ ████ █████████ ██ █████████ ████ ████████ ███ ██████ ██████ ████ ██████ █████████ ███ █████████ █████████ ███████████ ██ ████████████
There’s no evidence the author thinks we need to develop ways to redress companies that don’t have proof their former employees are revealing trade secrets. The author never suggests that the law needs to change or that courts should do anything differently.
d
Even concrete materials ████ ██ ████████ █████ ███ ██ ████ ██ ████ ███ ███████ ████ ██ ████ ██ █ █████ ██ ████ ███ ██████ ██ ███ ██ ███████ ███ ██████ ██ ███████████ ███████ ████████ ██████
There’s no evidence the author thinks efforts to protect physical objects with data that can be copied are wasted. The author never discusses copying data and efforts to prevent such copying. In addition, the author thinks injunctions
e
The psychological barriers ████ ██ ██████████ ███ █████ ██ ██ ████████ ██ █ ███ █████████ ███ ██████████ ██ ██████ ████ ████ ████ ██ ██████ ██ ███ █████████
There’s no evidence the author thinks the psychological barriers created by an injunction have “no” effect on employees. The author does think that the subconscious ways in which trade secrets might be used by an employee will be difficult to detect and prevent, but this doesn’t imply a belief that the psychological barriers have absolutely zero effect.