Dist. Court decision in Ford Motor Company v. Robert
Lane 67 F.Supp.2d 745 (1999)
67 F. Supp. 2d 745 (1999)
52 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1345
Ford Motor Company, Plaintiff,
v.
Robert Lane d/b/a Warner Publications, Defendant.
Case No. 99-74205
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN, SOUTHERN DIVISION
September 7, 1999, Decided
September 7, 1999, Filed
DISPOSITION: Ford's motion for preliminary injunction is GRANTED IN PART AND
DENIED IN PART.
COUNSEL: For FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Plaintiff: Ernie L. Brooks, Robert C.
Tuttle, Frank
A. Angileri, Brooks & Kushman, Southfield, MI.
JUDGES: Nancy G. Edmunds, U.S. District Judge.
OPINION BY: Nancy G. Edmunds
OPINION: ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Thirty years ago, on September 2, 1969, computer scientists at UCLA introduced a
system which allowed one computer to speak to another. The birth of the Internet,
inauspicious at the time, presaged a revolution in worldwide communications. In the
realm of law, we are only beginning to grapple with the impact of the communications
revolution, and this case represents just one part of one skirmish -- a clash between our
commitment to the freedom of speech and the press, and our dedication to the
protection of commercial innovation and intellectual property. In this case, the battle is
won by the First Amendment.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. n1
Although Defendant has stipulated to certain provisions of the injunction, including a
prohibition on the infringing publication of copyrighted materials, Defendant
challenges the provision which would enjoin him from using, copying, or disclosing any
internal document of Ford Motor Company (including information contained therein).
Plaintiff also seeks to enjoin Defendant from using Ford's logo on his website. For the
reasons set forth below, this Court finds that, although Ford has presented substantial
evidence to support its claim that Lane violated the Michigan Uniform Trade Secrets Act,
an injunction restraining Defendant's publication of Ford's trade secrets would constitute
an invalid prior restraint of free speech in violation of the First Amendment. Thus,
Plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction enjoining Defendant's use, copying, or
disclosing of Plaintiffs internal documents is DENIED.
SNIPPETS:
Ford Motor Company, Plaintiff, v. Robert Lane d/b/a Warner Publications, Defendant.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN, SOUTHERN DIVISION
Nancy G. Edmunds, U.S. District Judge.
OPINION: ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
Thirty years ago, on September 2, 1969, computer scientists at UCLA introduced a system which
In the realm of law, we are only beginning to grapple with the impact of the communications
n1 Although Defendant has stipulated to certain provisions of the injunction, including a
For the reasons set forth below, this Court finds that, although Ford has presented
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n1 A Temporary
The website publishes information about Ford and its products on the Internet, and has
Affidavit of Nancy Oatley, Ex.
Lane threatened to encourage Ford employees to disclose confidential information.
This information, which may be embodied in documents, electronic data or other forms, is a
Ford's Standards of Corporate Conduct manual also states, "Every employee is obligated to
Analysis A. Misappropriation of Trade Secrets and the Prior Restraint Doctrine Our
Applying a state statute which authorized an injunction of "malicious, scandalous, and
|
