Patents vs Trade Secrets

The cluster centers on debates about the purposes, trade-offs, and strategic choices between patents—which require public disclosure for temporary exclusivity—and trade secrets, which risk reverse-engineering or theft but allow indefinite secrecy.

📉 Falling 0.2x Legal
2,317
Comments
20
Years Active
5
Top Authors
#3699
Topic ID

Activity Over Time

2007
6
2008
16
2009
44
2010
87
2011
115
2012
168
2013
129
2014
140
2015
125
2016
153
2017
140
2018
186
2019
142
2020
156
2021
200
2022
133
2023
199
2024
101
2025
76
2026
1

Keywords

CS e.g US XX CPU MIPS OK OSS YY NO patent patents trade secrets secrets secret trade patented public technology invention

Sample Comments

nybble41 Sep 23, 2021 View on HN

Trade secrets don't prevent someone else from independently developing the same thing, or reverse-engineering the solution. Very few things can be successfully kept as trade secrets for an extended time. Moreover, patents do not preclude trade secrets and in most cases can only make things worse: If one expects to be able to maintain a trade secret for at least the duration of a patent, without independent rediscovery, then one would choose secrecy over the patent since there is no built-in

kyrieeschaton Jun 29, 2019 View on HN

"Secret patents" are a thing.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention_Secrecy_Act

gdrulia Sep 21, 2015 View on HN

I believe that if you want the protection of patent, you should disclose everything and it not suppose to be a secret. If you want to keep it as a secret, don't patent it. Isn't that is the reason behind the patent system? Inspire people to create things by providing certainty that no one will be allowed to reproduce their creations until patent expires. The only reasonable thing after that is to make the patented technology (including all the bits and pieces) a public knowledge.

coliveira May 26, 2020 View on HN

You are misunderstanding the matter of patents. Modern patents exist precisely because of the inevitability of industrial espionage, which is largely practiced by all developed countries. The goal is that, even after a trade secret is stolen, it will be made useless because nobody can use that information. So the goal is not to "share knowledge", but to avoid the practical use of knowledge that was shared by any means.Also, you are mistaken in thinking that, by publishing a patent,

Guvante Apr 24, 2015 View on HN

IIRC without patents you have trade secrets, patents ensure the details are more widely known (in theory).

gcb0 Feb 7, 2015 View on HN

wrong, they should patent it. let the hobbyist learn how they do, and prevent competitors from copying.they tried to have the cake (don't patent, don't publish) and eat it too (not pay people and processes enough to protect your trade secrets)

dTal Jun 8, 2014 View on HN

You are confusing patents with copyright. Patents were meant to encourage people to disclose. It was taken for granted that people will invent things regardless of patent protection - they will just keep their inventions trade secrets.

Gibbon1 Jul 28, 2022 View on HN

Don't want to reveal their methods cause patent infringement.

Already__Taken Nov 17, 2016 View on HN

Aren't you thinking of trade secrets by that statement? Patents would let anyone do it you just have to pay google their fee.

pestatije Aug 2, 2023 View on HN

Theyre going to have patents assigned...if they keep it secret someone else could get them first