Trade Secrets in the Fashion Supply Chain. Reflections prompted by the Florence Court’s Business Section No. 5 ruling of 5 January 2026

In today’s debate on the protection of innovation, the industrial trade secret is gaining renewed centrality. In a digital ecosystem where software, algorithms, processes and data have strategic value, many companies choose trade secrets as an alternative or complementary protection tool to patents.

Under Article 98 of the Italian Industrial Property Code, a trade secret consists of information that is not generally known or readily accessible to experts in the field, has economic value precisely because it is secret, and is protected through reasonable secrecy measures. This category includes not only formulas and source code, but also production processes, commercial methods, technical specifications, pricing strategies, databases and operational know‑how.

Advantages over patents

Trade secrets offer:

• potentially unlimited duration

• no mandatory disclosure

• broader coverage, especially for software, algorithms and internal processes

• speed and lower costs

The structural limitation is well known: trade secrets do not protect against reverse engineering or independent development.

For this reason, contractual and organizational protection is decisive. Safeguards may be:

• technical (authentication, encryption, data segregation)

• organizational (internal policies, information classification, training)

• contractual (NDAs, non‑compete clauses, licences, return‑of‑materials obligations)

  
  

Why Trade Secrets Matter in the Fashion Industry

Fashion is one of the sectors in which trade secrets have acquired growing strategic importance. The reason is simple: much of the information that generates competitive advantage is either not patentable or not worth patenting.

Key categories of trade secrets in fashion

• Proprietary production processes — dyeing techniques, fabric treatments, finishing processes, chemical formulations, quality protocols.

• Supply chain and sourcing — supplier mapping, economic conditions, lead times, production capacities: information that determines margins and market responsiveness.

• Prototyping and collection development — internal workflows, calendars, sampling methods, proprietary digital tools.

• Commercial data and strategies — prices, discount structures, sales forecasts, retail allocation algorithms, demand‑planning models.

• Digital technologies — virtual try‑on platforms, 3D configurators, blockchain traceability systems, collection‑management software.

  
  

Why trade secrets are crucial in fashion

• The speed of the industry makes patents often ineffective: registration times exceed the lifecycle of many innovations.

• Protection concerns processes, not only products.

• Competitive value is often behind the scenes.

• Confidentiality is part of brand identity: from material management to strategic suppliers, secrecy is a reputational asset.

• Digitalization increases exposure to risk: collaborative platforms, cloud systems, smart factories and remote work expand the attack surface.

Fashion companies must therefore implement:

• data‑access policies based on the need‑to‑know principle

• multilayer confidentiality agreements with employees, suppliers and consultants

• periodic audits on IT and document security

• onboarding/offboarding procedures including return and deletion of materials

• internal traceability of sensitive information

In fashion, protecting trade secrets is an exercise in governance, not merely in legal compliance.

The Florence Court’s Decision of 5 January 2026

The Judgment No. 5 of 5 January 2026 of the Florence Court – Business Section is significant because it clarifies a frequently overlooked point: there is no protection for a trade secret without precise identification of the secret’s content and of the measures adopted to protect it.

The Court states that it is not enough to invoke “technical specifications”, “platforms”, “programs”, or “know‑how”. The secret must be clearly defined, distinguished from what is public or accessible, and linked to a concrete economic value. The plaintiff’s generic allegations were deemed sufficient to dismiss the claim.

Moreover, the plaintiff’s partial withdrawal of some claims during the proceedings further undermined the coherence of the entire case. Renouncing part of the software‑related claims created uncertainty about the scope of protection and made it impossible to determine which information was actually secret. The judgment therefore highlights the importance of strategic consistency when constructing a trade‑secret claim.

Regarding secrecy measures, the Court stresses that they must be real, specific and proven. Generic passwords are not sufficient; merely asserting the existence of “protected platforms” is inadequate. It is necessary to demonstrate how the information was effectively protected. This is an innovative step because it distinguishes between de facto confidentiality and legally relevant secrecy.

Commercial information is not automatically a trade secret. Prices, contractual terms and customer needs may be confidential, but only if:

• specifically identified

• effectively protected

• not already known or easily knowable

Implications for the Fashion Supply Chain

The Florence Court’s decision:

• raises the evidentiary threshold for invoking trade‑secret protection

• confirms that protection cannot be improvised

• calls on companies to adopt structured policies and adequate technical measures

• draws a clear line between trade secrets, confidential information and mere know‑how

For the fashion supply chain—where competition revolves around processes, materials, supply chains and digital technologies—this ruling is a reminder: protecting trade secrets requires method, governance and documentation.