When facing charges of commercial espionage, characterizing customer behavior as legal “competitive Intelligence” (CI) is a common defense strategy, but a reasonable framework needs to be constructed through comprehensive analysis at the legal, factual, and ethical levels. Framework. The following are the key strategies and considerations： --- ###**1. Clarify the boundaries between laws and industry norms** 1. **Distinguish between legal and illegal means** -**Elements of legality of competitive intelligence collection**: Emphasize that customer behavior meets the following conditions： -Information comes from public sources (such as industry reports, patent databases, public speeches, recruitment information, exhibition materials). -Obtained through legitimate means such as reverse engineering, market research, or customer interviews. -Did not involve hacking into computer systems, bribery, stealing physical documents, or violating non-disclosure agreements (NDA). -**Legal basis**: Citing the "Anti-Economic Espionage Act" (such as the United States 18 U.S. S. C. §1831-1839) or the exception clause of local law on “legal acquisition”, emphasizing that the allegation needs to prove “intentional theft” or “knowing that the information is a trade secret." 2. **Industry practices and reasonable expectations** -Provide industry cases to prove that similar intelligence collection behavior is the norm in market competition (for example, the automotive industry analyzes competing models, and technology companies monitor patent dynamics). -Expert witnesses (such as CI practitioners or representatives of industry associations) can support the universality and compliance of the behavior. --- ###**2. Construct a defense framework at the factual level** 1. **Information traceability and access path** -Review the complete chain of customer information acquisition and exclude any illegal links (such as hacking attacks, insider leaks). -If the information comes from a former employee, it must be proved that he has not violated his confidentiality obligations (if the information belongs to personal experience and not the trade secret of the former employer). 2. **Subjective intention and purpose of use** -Advocate that the purpose of the customer is to "enhance their own competitiveness” rather than “harm the opponent” (for example, for product improvement rather than counterfeiting or low-cost bidding). -If the information has not been actually used or no damage has been caused, the “malicious” element can be weakened. 3. **Internal compliance measures** -Display the client company's compliance training records and intelligence collection policies to prove that it actively avoids illegal behavior (for example, ethical standards signed by employees, third-party data procurement agreements). --- ###**3. Key points that weaken the prosecution's charges** 1. **Question the constituent elements of ”trade secrets"** -The prosecution needs to prove that the information has economic value and that “reasonable confidentiality measures” have been taken. For example： -The opponent has not encrypted or controlled access to the data. -The information has been partially disclosed in industry forums or papers. 2. **Challenge the legitimacy of evidence** -If the prosecution's evidence stems from illegal surveillance or obtained in violation of procedures, it can apply for exclusion (such as violation of the "Electronic Communications Privacy Law"). 3. **Reduce the severity of damage** -Quantify and analyze the actual impact of the information, and claim that it has not caused significant economic losses or market monopolies. --- ###**4. Negotiation and alternative liability plan** 1. **Civil settlement priority** -Promote cases to shift from criminal to civil disputes (such as infringement of trade secrets), and resolve them through compensation, license agreements, etc. 2. **Plea negotiation strategy** -If the evidence is unfavorable, it can be negotiated to admit a lesser crime (such as “improper access to information” rather than “economic espionage”) to avoid heavy criminal penalties. --- ###**Five, Precautions** -**Differences in jurisdiction**: Different countries/regions have different tolerances for CI (for example, the EU's GDPR has stricter restrictions on data collection). - **Ethical boundaries**: Ensure that the defense does not involve falsifying evidence or instigating perjury, and avoid one's own professional risks. -**Reputation management**: Simultaneously prepare public relations strategies to reduce the long-term impact of cases on customers' business reputation. --- Through the above strategy, the core is to anchor customer behavior within the framework of “transparency, legitimacy, and industry acceptance”, while attacking the weak links of the prosecution's evidence chain to minimize or exempt liability. It is necessary to flexibly adjust in accordance with the specific circumstances of the case, and to introduce technical experts and legal counsel for collaborative analysis as soon as possible.