Episode 13: $1.8 Billion and Counting, The Cost of Trade Secret Theft

In this episode of the Reasonable Measures podcast, Tim and Chris return after a busy start to the year to dive into a landmark trade secret case: Phillips 66 v. Propel Fuels. They unpack how Propel secured a $604.9 million judgment—later tripled to a staggering $1.8 billion—due to willful and malicious trade secret misappropriation. The discussion highlights key risk mitigation strategies for companies navigating M&A due diligence and the evolving perception of trade secrets as a core intellectual property strategy. Tim and Chris also share insights from recent conferences and industry conversations, emphasizing how more organizations are proactively managing trade secret protection and governance.

Takeaways:

  • Massive trade secret verdicts are becoming more common. The Propel Fuels case reached nearly $2 billion, reinforcing the financial and legal consequences of misappropriation.
  • Enhanced damages signal the importance of due diligence. Courts will punish companies that exploit trade secret information obtained during M&A discussions.
  • Particularity matters. Propel protected itself by clearly defining 88 trade secrets, demonstrating best practices in trade secret identification and governance.
  • Trade secret strategy is maturing. Companies are shifting from reactive protection to proactive trade secret management, recognizing it as a critical IP asset.
  • Conferences reflect a changing IP landscape. Industry professionals are no longer debating whether to protect trade secrets but rather how to implement strong governance frameworks.
  • M&A due diligence requires caution. Companies must assume deals may not close and plan accordingly to prevent intellectual property exposure.

Transcript:

Tim (00:12): Hey, Chris, we’re at number 13—lucky number 13—of the Reasonable Measures podcast.

Chris (00:18): Hey Tim, it’s great to be here.

Tim (00:20): We’ve been a little busy, I think is the right word, right? You’ve been flying all over the place. I’m raising money. And unfortunately, the Reasonable Measures podcast took a little backseat at the start of the year. So, it’s great to be back, man. I’ve actually missed this, and we’re going to double down and knock out some episodes here. Today, we’re going to hit on one case rather quickly, and then we’re going to talk about some market insights, given both of our first quarter activities—you on the conference circuit and me between investors and customers. Some good stuff to catch up on.

So, the case we’re going to talk about today is a big one: Phillips 66 v. Propel Fuels. In 2024, this was a major decision—a $604.9 million judgment against Phillips 66 in favor of Propel Fuels. And just last week, there was an update in terms of enhanced damages.

Chris (01:59): Right. The jury initially awarded $605 million to compensate Propel for their losses. But in cases where there’s willful and malicious conduct, the judge has the ability to triple the damages, bringing it up to $1.8 billion. That’s exactly what happened here. The court determined that Phillips 66’s conduct was so egregious that it warranted enhanced damages.

Tim (03:24): That’s an enormous number. And if we look back at previous trade secret cases, it’s getting close to the Appian case, which had a high-water mark of $2 billion. But even though Appian was knocked down on appeal and is facing a new trial, this $1.8 billion decision is still a massive moment in trade secret law.

Chris (04:22): Yeah, it’s another example of the power dynamics in trade secret disputes. Propel was a startup, and Phillips 66 is a major corporation. They were engaged in due diligence for an acquisition or investment, and Propel had shared proprietary information under an NDA. This kind of scenario happens all the time—startups sharing their trade secrets, assuming the deal will go through.

Tim (05:02): Right. The problem is, when deals don’t close, all of that confidential information remains in the hands of the larger company. Propel did the right thing by specifically identifying 88 trade secrets, which made their case strong. The fact that Phillips 66 announced a competing product the very next business day after breaking off the deal? That’s a red flag.

Chris (06:18): Exactly. Propel had great documentation, and the court clearly saw that Phillips 66 was acting in bad faith. If there’s one lesson here, it’s that companies need to document and protect their trade secrets proactively. Courts are increasingly demanding specificity when identifying trade secrets, and companies that take reasonable measures to protect them are in a much stronger position.

Tim (09:14): Switching gears a bit, you’ve been out on the conference circuit. What’s the vibe in the industry right now?

Chris (09:44): It feels like we’re turning a corner on trade secrets. A few years ago, people hesitated to document anything. Now, that’s changed. Companies understand trade secrets are a real IP asset, and they’re asking the right questions: What steps do we take tomorrow to protect them?

Tim (12:51): Yeah, and from my side, I had some interesting conversations with Fortune 100 companies recently. One semiconductor company has KPIs tied to trade secrets—that’s a big shift. A pharma company recognized the importance but still faces cultural hurdles in implementation. Then, there was a company that outright said, We don’t really have trade secrets. I had to bite my tongue on that one.

Chris (15:26): Oh, they definitely have trade secrets. But it does show how different industries are at different stages of trade secret adoption. The fact that we’re even seeing KPIs around trade secrets is a huge step forward.

Tim (16:24): 100%. It’s clear—companies are moving from Should we protect trade secrets? to How do we do it effectively? That’s exciting to see.

Chris (16:49): Absolutely. It’s good to see the market catching up to what we’ve been saying all along. Trade secrets are becoming a core part of IP strategy, not just an afterthought.

Tim (16:53): Agreed. Alright, Chris, see you on the other side. Later.

Chris (16:53): Thanks, Tim. Catch you later.

Trade Secret Litigation Lightning Round

Episode 12: Trade Secret Litigation Lightning Round

In this episode of the Reasonable Measures podcast, Tim and Chris discuss three notable trade secret cases from Latvia, China, and the United States. They explore the implications of whistleblower retaliation, the intersection of trade secrets and criminal law, and the complexities of ongoing litigation between IQVIA and Viva Systems. The conversation highlights the evolving landscape of trade secret protection and the legal challenges faced by companies and individuals.

Tangibly Podcast Episode 11

Episode 11: The trade secret most likely to be stolen

Discover why customer lists are the most litigated trade secrets in this episode of The Reasonable Measures Podcast. Hosts Tim and Chris explore key case studies, trade secret definitions, and practical tips for protecting valuable IP.

Reasonable Measures Episode 10

Episode 10: Trade Secret Damages are Calculated Globally

Explore the high-stakes Motorola vs. Hytera trade secret lawsuit involving global damages and cross-border IP theft. Learn how U.S. trade secret laws protect multinational companies, with insights into damages, injunctions, and global legal implications.

Reasonable Measures Episode 8

Episode 8: Appian’s $2b Trade Secret Win Goes “Poof”

Explore the reversal of Appian’s $2 billion trade secret damages award against Pegasystems. Discover key issues in the damages calculation, insurance complexities, and the potential for refiling under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA).

Reasonable Measures Episode 7

Episode 7: Record Breaking Judgement in Trade Secret Case

Explore the landmark Chengdu v. Wei case on The Reasonable Measures Podcast. Discover how China’s record-breaking $88M trade secret judgment signals a shift in IP enforcement, driven by domestic pressures for stronger protections and fair competition.

Reasonable Measures Episode 6

Episode 6: The Professor Owes His Students $26.6M

Discover the dramatic Sigma Pharma trade secret lawsuit in The Reasonable Measures Podcast. Learn how extreme employment terms led to a $26.6M judgment and key takeaways for employees and startups navigating equity agreements and legal disputes.

Reasonable Measures Episode 4

Episode 4: Samsung BOE trade secret case at the ITC

Explore the Samsung-BOE trade secret case and the ITC’s pivotal role in resolving IP disputes. Discover how the ITC’s swift investigations, import bans, and global jurisdiction make it a powerful tool for protecting trade secrets in high-stakes cases.

Reasonable Measures Episode 3

Episode 3: The Battle Over the FTC Ban on Non-Compete Agreements

Explore the legal challenges to the FTC’s non-compete ban and its implications for trade secret protection. Learn how companies like Jane Street safeguard sensitive information without non-competes and discover the growing role of the ITC in trade secret disputes.

Reasonable Measures Episode 2

Episode 2: Trade secret misappropriation by an FDA official?

Explore the FTC’s non-compete ban and its impact on trade secrets, plus Vanda Pharmaceuticals’ case against the FDA over alleged trade secret disclosures. Learn how these developments shape IP law and government accountability on The Reasonable Measures Podcast.

Reasonable Measures Episode 1

Episode 1: All Roads Lead To India

Join Tim Londergan and Chris on The Reasonable Measures Podcast as they delve into trade secrets, IP law, and global case studies. From India’s push for a trade secret statute to a case law review in the U.S., discover how laws are evolving to meet local business needs.

keyboard_arrow_up