Trade Secrets: Navigating geopolitical risks and IP theft in the semiconductor industry

No items found.
​
November 4, 2025

Cases of IP theft in the semiconductor industry are on the rise. IP theft is often driven by a desire to accelerate technological development and gain a competitive edge without incurring the high costs of R&D. In August 2025, Taiwanese authorities arrested three current and former employees of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC) for allegedly stealing technology trade secrets about the company's manufacturing processes to share with a rival company in Japan. Such cases highlight the threats to organisations' IP, highlighting the importance of identifying what IP you own and how best to protect it.

Semiconductor IP: Intellectual Property Rights

Semiconductors and the products which utilise them may be protected by a range of registered and unregistered IP rights, including:

  • copyright (written designs, instructions, layouts, software and applications, copyright in data etc);
  • patents (the high-level functional designs as well as innovation in the structure or operation of devices);
  • designs (chip layouts and circuit design);
  • database rights (the collection of data associated with chip design and manufacturing);
  • topography rights (the layout designs of integrated circuits).

IP rights, such as patents, generally require that the right holder discloses their ideas to the public. The right holder is awarded limited legal protection in return for putting their innovation into the public domain. This might not always be desired. Sometimes, keeping information confidential can offer a better form of protection. For example, the secrets of manufacturing processes may not be discoverable from the finished product. Keeping such know-how behind closed doors may offer the owner better protection than disclosing it in return for a patent.

This is where trade secrets come in.

What is a trade secret?

A trade secret is a special category of confidential information. They are statutorily defined to mean information that:

(i) is secret, meaning it is not generally known among, or readily accessible to, persons within the circles that normally deal with the kind of information in question;

(ii) has commercial value to the business; and

(iii) has been subject to reasonable steps taken by the person lawfully in control of the information to keep it secret.

In the UK, trade secrets are primarily protected under common law through the doctrine of breach of confidence (protecting against the unauthorised use of information which is confidential in nature and disclosed in circumstances importing an obligation of confidence). This is supplemented by the Trade Secrets (Enforcement, etc.) Regulations 2018, which implemented the EU Directive 2016/943 (Trade Secrets Directive). 

Under the Trade Secrets Directive and Regulations, trade secrets are infringed through unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure.

In the context of semiconductors, trade secrets may be used to protect material compositions, proprietary manufacturing processes and testing methodologies.

The loss of a trade secret can have one of the most significant impacts on a company's competitive edge. Therefore, ensuring that a company has a well-organised trade secret framework and governance which is fit for all key territories, is essential in today's geopolitical landscape.

Protecting trade secrets

What qualifies as a trade secret can be wide ranging. As such, protecting them requires a holistic approach, including strong legal safeguards like contracts (e.g., non-disclosure agreements, restrictions on use and employee and trade restrictive covenants). This should be coupled with robust internal policies, such as employee training, physical and electronic access controls and security measures. Steps should be taken to safeguard proprietary information like manufacturing processes, source code, chip designs, and chemical formulations from both internal and external threats.

In the event of misappropriation of a trade secret, the owner would need to demonstrate to what the trade secret relates. This is in part because a court needs to be able to define the secret in order to make orders relating to it (which is often harder than it sounds) and the steps taken to protect it. This involves:

  • Step 1: Identify – Businesses must carefully assess their important know-how to determine exactly whether it constitutes economic value to the business. This may require a dedicated team of people with knowledge of the information and strategic understanding of the company's objectives.
  • Step 2: Internal Measures – Consider what measures would be appropriate to protect such information. For example:
  • Limiting access to certain employees;
  • Controlling physical access e.g. housing R&D in a different building to other operations;
  • Classifying documents to demonstrate that the organisation clearly distinguishes between different categories of information;
  • HR policies and procedures around the protection and use of such information and how to report a disclosure/breach;
  • Training around the protection of information; and
  • Upgrading and/or adoption of systems and processes to ensure protection of the information.
  • Step 3: Legal Documentation – Robust contractual provisions can protect trade secrets. For example, an NDA could in certain circumstances prohibit reverse engineering of shared samples. Furthermore, such provisions can make it easier to pursue remedies for breach, including injunctions to prevent further use or disclosure, and compensation for loss suffered as a result.
  • Step 4: Monitoring and enforcement – Despite available legal protections, semiconductor companies face significant challenges in protecting trade secrets both from internal and external threats. Therefore, it is important that companies carry out ongoing monitoring of the information and take necessary action as soon as reasonably practicable in the event of misappropriation or compromise to the security of its information.

Trade Secrets v Patents

Deciding whether to keep inventions secret or to patent them, largely depends on the ability to detect the invention in a finished product. If an idea is patentable, and it is possible to detect it in the product, getting a patent might be commercially sensible. This might apply to features relating to the structure of a semiconductor device. A patent would allow the patent holder to exclude others from exploiting the technology, giving them a competitive advantage. Such an advantage might increase revenue, or for early-stage companies, it may help entice investors. However, in doing so the idea will be made public, as most patents are published during the application process. Conversely, it may make better commercial sense to keep an idea secret. For example, inventions relating to semiconductor manufacturing processes are not typically detectable in the end product. By filing a patent, you are telling the world about your important processes, but any resulting patent may not be enforceable, given the difficulty in detecting the use of the process.

In addition, patenting can be expensive, especially if you seek protection in a large number of jurisdictions. You may also need to police and enforce any granted patents, which can prove more difficult in ‘hidden' technologies (e.g. in chips and behind APIs). Also, unlike patents, which publish after 18 months and only usually last up to 20 years, trade secrets can remain ‘secret' indefinitely (assuming no leaks or independent third-party development). Above all else, commercial considerations are key, and early legal advice is essential to ensure appropriate and proper protection.

Key takeaways for businesses

Trade secrets provide essential protection for proprietary confidential information. The complex designs and innovations that power semiconductor manufacturing are invaluable. However, as geopolitical competition heats up for economic and technological dominance, semiconductor companies increasingly become targets of IP theft. Board members need to be alert to this risk and be putting in place robust measures to protect their intellectual assets. By having a well-organised trade secret framework and robust internal governance, semiconductor companies will be better prepared to handle and respond to challenges posed by the geopolitical landscape.

The Latest Thought Leadership pieces in the Content Hub

INTA 2026 Essentials: Where to stay, what to see and what to do
June 3, 2025
Discover the INTA 2026 Essentials! This comprehensive guide will help you navigate your stay, showcasing the best accommodations, must-see attractions, and exciting activities to enjoy during your visit.
Stay in the Know

The Patent Strategist

Get expert insights and the top patent stories delivered straight to your inbox.

Heading
This is some text inside of a div block.
This is some text inside of a div block.

Latest Insights

Showing 0 of 100
Is Your AI Conversation Privileged?
08 May 2026
Recent US court decisions have, for the first time, tested whether conversations with AI tools can be protected by legal privilege. In United States v. Heppner, a court held that documents generated by a defendant using a public AI platform were not protected by attorney‑client privilege, largely because the AI was not used within a lawyer‑directed relationship and the platform’s terms allowed data retention and disclosure. By contrast, in Warner v. Gilbarco, another court found that AI‑assisted materials created by a self‑represented litigant were protected under the work‑product doctrine, which has a more forgiving standard for waiver.
#
Consulting
​
The evolution of nucleic acid sequencing and what it means for Genomics and IP
27 April 2026
This article outlines the evolution of nucleic acid sequencing, from early Sanger methods to next‑generation and long‑read technologies. The journey from deciphering individual DNA strands to sequencing entire genomes in hours represents one of biotechnology's most impressive transformations. The first human genome, completed through the Human Genome Project, took around 13 years to sequence and cost billions of dollars, whereas modern sequencing methods can now deliver a genome in hours for a few hundred dollars. For those interested in patents and life sciences, understanding the technical evolution of sequencing methods offers insights into how fundamental scientific advances translate into valuable patent portfolios.
#
Consulting
​
World IP Day: The big ideas shaping IP's fastest-moving fields
24 April 2026
For World IP Day, we asked experts of EIP’s five growth areas: Uniphy, Ampliphy, Stratiphy, Codiphy and Quantiphy, to share a quick insight on innovation, IP trends, and what excites them about the future. Each responded to a single, focused question reflecting the role their team plays across EIP.
#
Consulting
​
Meet the EIP team heading to INTA 2026 in London
23 April 2026
INTA's Annual Meeting is coming to London. From 2–6 May 2026, the ExCeL will host more than 10,000 trade mark and IP professionals from over 100 jurisdictions — five days of sessions, side events, and the kind of corridor conversations that turn into lasting working relationships.
#
Litigation
​
Antibody Patent Protection in Europe and the US: Navigating EPO and USPTO Differences
16 April 2026
This article explores the complexities of patenting antibody therapies, focusing on the differing requirements and practices of the European Patent Office (EPO) and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). It highlights how the scope of claims, inventiveness standards, and supporting data requirements vary between jurisdictions, and explains why a tailored IP strategy is essential for innovators especially SMEs seeking protection in both Europe and the US. The article also outlines how EIP’s transatlantic teams collaborate to optimise patent applications for success in these key markets.
#
Patenting
​
Why competitor patent monitoring is critical to your drug development strategy
15 April 2026
This article explains why competitor IP monitoring is a critical part of an effective drug development strategy. By tracking competitor patent activity, companies can assess freedom to operate, identify risks and opportunities early, and make informed decisions on patent filings, licensing, and investment readiness. Ongoing monitoring also supports FTO analysis, third‑party observations, oppositions, and litigation strategy, helping life sciences businesses protect value and reduce risk throughout development.
#
Consulting
​
Biopharma Strategy in 2026: Lessons from 2025 on AI, M&A and the UPC
13 April 2026
This article looks back on a selection of key trends in the (bio)pharma industry in 2025 and looks ahead to how these may continue to develop into 2026.
#
Consulting
​
Thinking about IP from day one: strategic considerations for deep tech startups
08 April 2026
For deep tech startups, intellectual property decisions often come too late or cost too much too soon. This article explores why IP strategy should be considered from day one, even if formal protection comes later. It outlines how founders can decide what to patent, when trade secrets may be more appropriate, and how detectability, enforceability and cost should shape early choices. With a focus on practicality and commercial alignment, it also looks at how newer, AI‑assisted approaches can help startups take a more cost‑effective and flexible approach to building meaningful IP protection.
#
Consulting
​
National offices report increases in national patent applications throughout Europe: Is the EPO no longer “killing” the national offices?
27 March 2026
National patent offices across Europe have reported a marked increase in patent filings in 2025, breaking with a long‑standing downward trend. Data from Germany, France, Italy, Sweden, Austria, Spain and Norway point to growing activity driven by digital technologies, electrification and increased university participation. At the same time, offices report a rise in self‑drafted and AI‑assisted applications, which may lower barriers to entry but also raise concerns about application quality and examination efficiency.
#
Patenting
​
Make your bio(pharma) IP investment ready
22 March 2026
This recap of our LinkedIn Live series focuses on helping (bio)pharma businesses make their IP investment‑ready. Across three sessions, experts will discuss building resilient IP portfolios, making strategic IP decisions ahead of funding rounds, and what the evolving 2026 (bio)pharma landscape means for long‑term IP strategy.
#
Patenting
​
Are professional guidelines making Patent Attorneys too cautious on AI?
19 February 2026
As AI use accelerates in patent practice, many European patent attorneys remain cautious due to professional AI guidelines from the epi. This article argues those guidelines are not a barrier, but a baseline for responsible use.
#
Patenting
​
Provisional Agreement Reached on the EU Pharma Package: Takeaways for Pharmaceutical Companies
17 February 2026
The EU’s new Pharma Package will overhaul regulatory exclusivity, orphan drug incentives, antimicrobial innovation, and generic entry pathways, reducing standard protection periods while introducing new rewards like transferable exclusivity vouchers.
#
Patenting
​
Beyond CRISPR: Precision to Platform
23 January 2026
Gene editing is entering a new phase, moving beyond CRISPR-Cas9’s breakthrough but costly, bespoke therapies toward more precise and scalable platforms. While CRISPR-based treatments like Casgevy have proven clinical success, they remain expensive and entangled in ongoing patent disputes over foundational IP. Next-generation tools such as base editing and prime editing avoid double-strand DNA breaks, enabling more accurate corrections and broader therapeutic potential. The field’s focus is now shifting to disease-agnostic platforms that can be adapted across many conditions, improving access and efficiency.
#
Patenting
​
Confidentiality at the UPC: What litigants need to know
21 January 2026
This article explains how the Unified Patent Court approaches confidentiality in litigation, outlining the procedures for restricting access to sensitive information, how confidentiality clubs are formed, and when hearings may be held in private. It highlights key case law shaping these rules, the balance between fair trial rights and protection of commercial data, and the penalties for breaches. Practical guidance is provided to help parties navigate applications, manage confidential documents, and understand what to expect throughout UPC proceedings.
#
Litigation
​
EPO fees are going up in April 2026: Plan ahead now
19 January 2026
The European Patent Office will introduce a fee increase of roughly 5% from 1 April 2026, affecting search, examination, designation and renewal fees. Filing, excess page, opposition and appeal fees remain unchanged. Some costs—such as renewal fees—can be paid up to three months early, allowing applicants to secure the current lower rates. EIP recommends reviewing your portfolio ahead of the deadline.
#
Patenting
​