NEWS

Four-Year Review of the Trade Secrets Act (GeschGehG)

 Contents

The Trade Secrets Act (GeschGehG), which came into force on April 26, 2019, is based on the EU Directive for the protection of confidential know-how and business information. It marks a significant improvement in the protection of trade secrets in Germany, which were previously primarily regulated under criminal law as “betrayal of trade and business secrets.”

Key Aspects of the GeschGehG

  • Strengthening the Rights of Secret Holders: The law strengthens the claims of holders against potential violators of their trade secrets.
  • Requirement for Appropriate Confidentiality Measures: A key innovation is the need for “appropriate confidentiality measures” to protect know-how as a trade secret.
  • Definition of a Trade Secret: A trade secret is information that is not generally known or readily accessible, has economic value, is protected by appropriate measures, and has a legitimate interest in being kept secret.

Challenges and Practical Implementation

  • Uncertainties in the Definition of Appropriate Measures: There is no clear list of measures that companies must take to protect their information as trade secrets.
  • Criteria for Assessing Appropriateness: These include the type of secret, its use, value, the nature of the information, company size, and existing confidentiality measures.
  • Various Protective Measures: Companies can implement organizational, technical, and legal measures, including access restrictions, contractual provisions, and non-disclosure agreements.
  • Need for Regular Review: Companies must regularly review and adjust their protective measures to safeguard their intellectual capital.
  • Burden of Proof on the Secret Holder: The holder must be able to prove the measures taken in the event of a legal violation.

New Developments and Outlook

  • Permission for Reverse Engineering: Another important change is the permission for reverse engineering according to § 3 Abs. 1 Nr. 2 GeschGehG, which allows a trade secret to be obtained by observing, examining, deconstructing, or testing a product. Previously, this was only allowed if any expert could derive the trade secret without significant time, labor, and cost. Therefore, it is important to keep “reverse engineering” in mind, especially in confidentiality agreements, and to consider it appropriately.
  • Further Development of Jurisprudence: As the GeschGehG is relatively new, further clarifications by the jurisprudence are expected.

To the point

Companies should continuously inform themselves about developments in the area of the GeschGehG and take and document appropriate confidentiality measures to effectively protect their trade secrets. We are happy to assist you in this regard.

MORE NEWS
Trademark Law

AI & Branding: Europe’s brand work between “back to basics” and a GenAI leap

European marketing teams are putting branding back at the top for 2026—while GenAI is still rarely scaled broadly. At the same time, DPMA/EUIPO figures show sustained trademark activity.
Trademark Law

German Federal Court of Justice: No title protection for names of fictional film characters without an independent “life” – “Moneypenny”

The BGH clarifies: A fictional character’s name may in principle enjoy title protection—but only if the character itself is perceived as an independently “designatable” work (part) under trademark law. For “Moneypenny”, the court found insufficient individualisation and no sufficient detachment from the underlying work.
Trademark Law

GPTO enables EU-wide protection of regional products – new rights for craft and industrial goods

DPMA enables protection of geographical indications for industrial products such as knives, porcelain & watches – new EU regulation now in force.
Copyright / Design Law

Copyright protection for utilitarian objects: same test as for other works

The CJEU has held that utilitarian objects and works of applied art are protected by copyright under the same originality standard as any other category of works. It rejects a stricter threshold for everyday objects and provides detailed guidance on how national courts must assess originality and infringement in this context.
Copyright

Memorisation of AI training data infringes copyright

The Regional Court of Munich I has held that the memorisation of copyrighted training data in OpenAI’s GPT models infringes copyright. The judgment reshapes the legal framework for AI training and highlights key compliance risks for AI providers, rightsholders and companies using generative AI.

Using an outdated strikethrough price is misleading

The Wiesbaden Regional Court held that advertising with outdated, significantly higher strike-through prices is misleading and violates the German Price Indication Ordinance (PAngV) in conjunction with the UWG. Consumers understand crossed-out prices as the most recently charged price; if the reference price does not reflect that and there is no clear explanation, the ad suggests an overstated discount. Therefore, strike-through prices must be tied to the price immediately charged before the reduction.

Karin Simon
Lawyer
Certified IP Lawyer

Susanne Graeser
Lawyer
Certified IP Lawyer

Uhlandstr. 2
80336 Munich
Germany

Karin Simon
Rechtsanwältin
Fachanwältin für gewerblichen Rechtsschutz

Susanne Graeser
Rechtsanwältin
Fachanwältin für gewerblichen Rechtsschutz

Uhlandstr. 2
D-80336 München