Business Adventures: Twelve Classic Tales from the World of Wall Street. Chapter 11. One Free Bite

这一章讲述了 *古德里奇诉沃格莫斯* 一案，这是 1960 年代美国一场具有里程碑意义的商业秘密法律战，其导火索是蓬勃发展的太空竞赛和科学人才日益增长的流动性。唐纳德·W·沃格莫斯是 B.F. 古德里奇公司一位前途光明的化学工程师，该公司深度参与宇航服设计。国际乳胶公司 (ILC) 通过一份利润丰厚的新阿波罗项目分包合同，高薪挖走了沃格莫斯，该公司是古德里奇的主要竞争对手。受到大幅加薪和搬迁到更靠近妻子家乡的诱惑，沃格莫斯接受了这份工作。 在沃格莫斯辞职后，古德里奇的高管们，尤其是韦恩·加洛韦，担心他不可避免地会向乳胶公司泄露机密信息，这些信息对于古德里奇在宇航服市场上的竞争优势至关重要。沃格莫斯关于忠诚是有价的轻率言论加剧了局势，导致古德里奇迅速终止了他的雇佣关系，并威胁采取法律行动。他们强调了沃格莫斯从军队服役归来后签署的保密协议，该协议禁止披露公司信息。古德里奇担心沃格莫斯的离开意味着失去多年来投入其独特宇航服技术的研究和开发。 乳胶公司坚持他们的聘用，承诺支付沃格莫斯的法律费用，并赔偿他的工资损失。古德里奇认为此事关乎商业道德和商业秘密的保护，因此向普通诉讼法院提起诉讼，寻求禁令，以阻止沃格莫斯披露任何机密信息，并阻止他为宇航服领域的任何竞争对手工作。该案件引起了广泛关注，突显了保护企业知识产权与允许科学家个人自由追求职业机会之间的紧张关系。 审判围绕三个关键问题展开：古德里奇是否拥有合法的商业秘密，沃格莫斯是否知晓这些秘密，以及如果不批准禁令救济，古德里奇是否会遭受无法弥补的损害。古德里奇试图证明其宇航服制造工艺的独特性，而辩方则试图证明这些工艺根本不是秘密，或者已被乳胶公司知晓。在审判过程中，甚至出现了一个有些滑稽的时刻，一位乳胶公司的员工在宇航服中汗流浃背，恳求摘掉头盔。沃格莫斯的辩护基于他没有带走任何文件，并且他不太可能记住科学过程的复杂细节。 法律论证的关键在于“一次免费咬”原则，它基于“每只狗都有一次免费咬人机会”的说法。辩方认为，除非沃格莫斯已经披露了机密信息，否则不能对他采取任何行动。古德里奇反驳说，乳胶公司故意招募沃格莫斯表明存在恶意，否定了“一次免费咬”原则。 法官哈维最终驳回了禁令，认为没有足够的证据表明沃格莫斯有恶意，并将案件的重点更多地放在乳胶公司的行为上，而不是他自己的行为上。古德里奇提出上诉。 上诉法院部分推翻了该判决，发布了一项限制令，允许沃格莫斯为乳胶公司从事宇航服开发工作，但禁止他披露古德里奇的商业秘密。这一妥协反映了保护公司利益与允许专业人士发展事业之间的微妙平衡。 该案件在没有进一步上诉的情况下结束。沃格莫斯进入乳胶公司工作，在小心翼翼不违反法院命令的同时，应对着新角色的复杂性。古德里奇虽然没有积极监视沃格莫斯，但期望他和乳胶公司都遵守法律。*古德里奇诉沃格莫斯* 一案确立了一个重要的先例，影响了未来的商业秘密纠纷，并提高了人们对雇主和雇员在科学人才日益流动的时代所拥有的权利和责任的认识。

This chapter recounts the case of *Goodrich v. Wolgomath*, a landmark trade secrets legal battle in 1960s America, sparked by the burgeoning space race and the increasing mobility of scientific talent. Donald W. Wolgomath, a promising chemical engineer at B.F. Goodrich, a company deeply involved in space suit design, is headhunted by International Latex Corporation (ILC), a major competitor with a lucrative new Apollo project subcontract. Lured by a significant salary increase and a relocation closer to his wife's family, Wolgomath accepts the offer. Upon Wolgomath's resignation, Goodrich executives, particularly Wayne Galloway, express concern that he will inevitably disclose confidential information to Latex, information critical to Goodrich's competitive advantage in the spacesuit market. Wolgomath's flippant remark about loyalty having a price exacerbates the situation, leading Goodrich to promptly terminate his employment and threaten legal action. They highlight a confidentiality agreement Wolgomath signed upon his return from military service, prohibiting the disclosure of company information. Goodrich fears that Wolgomath's departure represents the loss of years of research and development invested in its unique space suit technologies. Latex stands by their offer, promising to cover Wolgomath's legal expenses and indemnify him against salary losses. Goodrich, viewing the situation as a matter of business ethics and the protection of their trade secrets, files suit in the Court of Common Pleas, seeking an injunction to prevent Wolgomath from disclosing any confidential information and from working for any competitor in the spacesuit field. The case garners significant attention, highlighting the tension between protecting corporate intellectual property and allowing individual scientists the freedom to pursue career opportunities. The trial revolves around three key issues: whether Goodrich possessed legitimate trade secrets, whether Wolgomath knew these secrets, and whether Goodrich would suffer irreparable harm if injunctive relief was not granted. Goodrich attempts to demonstrate the uniqueness of its spacesuit manufacturing processes, while the defense tries to prove these processes are not secrets at all or were already known by ILC. The court even witnesses a somewhat comical moment when a Latex employee, sweltering in a spacesuit during the trial, pleads to remove his helmet. Wolgomath's defense rests on the fact that he took no documents with him and that he is unlikely to remember the intricate details of the scientific processes. The crux of the legal argument comes down to the "one free bite" doctrine, based on the saying that "every dog gets one free bite." The defense argues that unless Wolgomath has already disclosed confidential information, no action can be taken against him. Goodrich counters that ILC's deliberate recruitment of Wolgomath suggests malicious intent, negating the "one free bite" principle. Judge Harvey ultimately denies the injunction, finding insufficient evidence of evil intent on Wolgomath's part, placing the focus of the case more onto ILC's actions rather than his own. Goodrich appeals. The Court of Appeals partially reverses the decision, issuing a restraining order that allows Wolgomath to work for Latex in spacesuit development but prohibits him from disclosing Goodrich's trade secrets. This compromise reflects the delicate balance between protecting corporate interests and allowing individual professionals to advance their careers. The case concludes without further appeals. Wolgomath goes to work for Latex, navigating the complexities of his new role while being careful not to violate the court order. Goodrich, while not actively policing Wolgomath, expects both him and Latex to comply with the law. The *Goodrich v. Wolgomath* case establishes an important precedent, influencing future trade secret disputes and raising awareness of the rights and responsibilities of both employers and employees in the era of increasingly mobile scientific talent.