從美國起訴聯電案比較經濟間諜行為之防制: 域外管轄到組織體責任

Translated title of the contribution: Economic Espionage Act and the Indictment of UMC: Perspectives of Long-arm Jurisdiction and Corporate Criminal Liability

劉 怡君*, Chih-Chieh Lin

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The United States’ indictment of United Microelectronics Corporation, Fujian Jinhua Integrated Circuit Corporation, and three employees highlights the differences between the trade secret criminal law systems of Taiwan and the United States, including long-arm jurisdiction, criminal conspiracy, and the corporate criminal liability. Corporations unfamiliar with these differences are more likely to violate relevant criminal regulations and thus face serious legal jeopardy when engaging in international business. This article suggests that, due to the huge costs of such liability, corporations should improve their legal compliance culture and establish information security management systems. Government authorities should pay attention to the defects in the trade secret protection legal and enforcement systems and should set up appropriate criminal liability and enforcement procedure systems that apply to both natural persons and organizations. Such regulations can serve as means of correcting corporation governance defects and promoting legal compliance culture in corporations. They can also help protect trade secrets and maintain domestic industrial competition.
Translated title of the contributionEconomic Espionage Act and the Indictment of UMC: Perspectives of Long-arm Jurisdiction and Corporate Criminal Liability
Original languageChinese (Traditional)
Pages (from-to)49-69
Number of pages21
Journal月旦法學雜誌
Issue number297
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2020

Keywords

  • Economic Espionage
  • Long-Arm Jurisdiction
  • Conspiracy
  • Corporate Criminal Liability
  • Trade Secret

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Economic Espionage Act and the Indictment of UMC: Perspectives of Long-arm Jurisdiction and Corporate Criminal Liability'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this