When dealing with cases where customers are accused of commercial espionage, the key is to distinguish between legal competitive intelligence collection and illegal commercial espionage activities. The following are some possible legal strategies and interpretation directions, but please note that specific cases need to be combined with facts and legal advice.： --- ### 1. **Clarify the boundaries of legal competitive intelligence** -**Definition differences**: Emphasize that competitive intelligence collection is a legal business practice, usually based on public information (such as industry reports, patents, public speeches, recruitment information, etc.), while commercial espionage involves illegal means (such as theft, bribery, hacking). -**Legality of source of information**: Prove that the source of the customer's information is public or obtained through legal means (such as reverse engineering, public databases, and third-party research in compliance). --- ### 2. **Prove the lack of ”intentional violation of the law" element** -**Subjective intent**: Commercial espionage usually requires proof that the defendant ”knowingly or intentionally" violated the law. If you can prove the customer： -Mistakenly believe that the information is public or legally available； -Relied on misleading advice from the legal or compliance team； -There is no direct evidence that it instructed or participated in illegal acts (such as theft, intrusion). -**Company policy**: Provide internal compliance training records, indicating that the client company encourages legal competitive intelligence and clearly prohibits illegal methods. --- ### 3. **Technical defense: Nature and value of information** -**Non-confidentiality**: The alleging party needs to prove that the information is a "trade secret” (if reasonable confidentiality measures have been taken). Can be questioned： -Whether the information is truly confidential (if it has been partially disclosed)； -Whether the information has actual economic value. -**Possibility of independent development**: Prove that customers can independently obtain similar information through legal means (such as existing R&D records). --- ### 4. **Procedural and evidentiary issues** -**Defects in the evidence chain**: questioning the legitimacy of the prosecution's evidence (such as violations of evidence collection procedures and unreliable sources of evidence). -**Burden of proof**: In some jurisdictions, the prosecution needs to prove that the defendant's behavior is beyond the legal scope, and it can be required to provide sufficient evidence. --- ### 5. **Negotiate to reduce liability** -**Civil settlement**: If the case involves civil compensation, the behavior can be characterized as “excessive competition” rather than a crime through negotiation, and resolved through compensation or agreement. -**Cooperate with the investigation**: By actively cooperating with the investigation (such as providing some information) in exchange for mitigating penalties. --- ### 6. **Legal and cultural differences** -**Jurisdiction factors**: The definition of competitive intelligence varies greatly from country to country (for example, the U.S. Economic Espionage Act is stricter, while some countries allow more flexible business practices). Local jurisprudence or industry practices can be cited. -**Industry practices**: Intelligence collection in certain industries (such as technology and finance) is more common, and an “industry standard” defense can be advocated. --- ### Precautions： -**Avoid false statements**: All explanations must be based on facts. Falsifying evidence or misleading the court will increase legal liability. -* *Professional lawyers intervene**: Such cases usually need to be combined with intellectual property law, criminal law, anti-unfair competition law, etc. It is recommended that professional lawyers formulate specific strategies. --- The ultimate goal is to characterize the behavior as competitive behavior in a “gray area” rather than a crime, but it needs to be promoted strictly in accordance with the details of the case and legal regulations.