They resumed the American legislation the point about

Covered in French law the notion of industrial espionage

The general law punishes abuse of trust: when an employee uses the information that have been entrusted to him for a specific purpose for other purposes. This criminalisation has been used in the case against a Chinese trainee Valeo and, more recently, in the cases of Clearstream and Michelin. In addition to the diversion of purpose, French law punishes fraudulent obtaining information via a set of disparate texts on the violation of home, computer intrusion, receiving... This legal arsenal to cover 95 of cases. But the attempt of breach of trust is not criminally sanctioned and cannot therefore be accepted by the company as a ground for dismissal. Similarly, the offence to neglect security measures has no consequences. It is therefore legal gaps.

If 95 of cases are covered, are there really need for a new Act

A new text of law would play an educational role among the population. It is time that it understands that information has value and that disclosing information is equivalent to steal a computer or bank notes. Number of recommendations have already been made on this subject, just become a legal chestnut. The vote of the Loppsi II Act, MP Bernard Carayon attempted to file an amendment to fill existing gaps. Olivier Buquen, head of the inter-ministerial delegation to the economic intelligence, also works for a long time to a legislative proposal.

That is likely an employee accused of industrial espionage by his company in France

Between the risk of getting caught and the amounts involved, there is in France a such disproportion that people do not hesitate to engage in this type of activity, which is deplorable. For breach of confidence, the French law provides a maximum of 3 years ' imprisonment and 375,000 euros fine, or even a little more in some cases. The defence secrecy Act provides up to 15 years in criminal detention and 225,000 euros in fine.

How is the France with other countries

In sanction, the France has much lower than sentences in the United States, but in the middle of those applied in the old Europe. Because, on the old Continent, there are two blocks: one of the countries of old Europe and the countries that have joined Europe after the fall of the Berlin wall. They resumed the American legislation the point about. So-called Cohen Act provides up to 10 years ' imprisonment with fines up to millions of dollars. But a more severe penalty applied sporadically really a deterrent effect Is it not better a sentence more low but applied in a systematic manner It is clearly a problem of criminal policy.

How to evaluate the harm

In the United States, claimed fines are the "punitive damages" i.e. damages and interest which the amount is not calculated based on the injury. In France, the amount of damages must be equal to that of the harm. But how to calculate the damage in the case of electric vehicles for which it there has not yet even real market Taking into account the costs of economic development Reform legislation could perhaps draw from that of the counterfeiting Act.

The sentence can be aggravated if the information stolen by an employee was sent abroad And if in addition the company has State among its shareholders as in Renault

Espionage or treason in favour of a foreign country - espionage being a foreigner, treason being of a French - are sanctioned by the law on defence secrecy provides much heavier penalties. From the time when the State makes money in the business as participation, subsidies, tax research credit, or other business should actually benefit from this type of protection. But for the moment, this is not the case. And there is no relevant case law.

Read the full interview on lesechos.frlesechos.fr