New York Non-Disclosure Agreement Requirements
New York's trade secret protection under that common-law regime traces to a specific case: the Court of Appeals decision in Ashland Management Inc.
Introduction
New York's trade secret protection under that common-law regime traces to a specific case: the Court of Appeals decision in Ashland Management Inc. v. Janien, which adopted the Restatement of Torts six-factor test for what counts as a trade secret in the absence of a codified Uniform Trade Secrets Act. A Non-Disclosure Agreement in New York is an ordinary contract in which one or both parties agree to keep specified information confidential, and it operates independently of that common-law trade secret protection. New York also has no general statute governing non-compete agreements; enforceability of any restrictive covenant, including an NDA whose confidentiality definition functions as a work restriction, is decided under the reasonableness test the Court of Appeals set out in BDO Seidman v. Hirshberg: no broader than necessary to protect a legitimate employer interest, no undue hardship on the employee, and not injurious to the public. A 2023 bill that would have banned most non-compete agreements statewide, Senate Bill S3100A, passed both legislative chambers but was vetoed by Governor Hochul in December 2023 and never became law. New York does add one protection most other states reach through their own separate statute: Labor Law Section 203-f, enacted in 2023, voids any employment-agreement clause that tries to force an employee to assign an invention developed entirely on personal time without the employer's resources, unless the invention relates to the employer's business or resulted from work performed for the employer.
0/5000
Key Things to Know
- 1
New York does have an employee invention-assignment carve-out, Labor Law Section 203-f, enacted in 2023. It voids a clause in an NDA or employment agreement requiring an employee to assign an invention developed entirely on their own time without the employer's equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information, unless the invention relates to the employer's business or resulted from work performed for the employer.
- 2
New York has never adopted a trade secret statute of any kind, unlike most states. Protection for trade secrets shared under an NDA comes entirely from common law, through the Court of Appeals decision in Ashland Management Inc. v. Janien, 82 N.Y.2d 395 (1993), which adopted the Restatement of Torts six-factor test for what counts as a trade secret.
- 3
New York also has no general statute governing non-compete agreements. Whether a restrictive covenant, including an NDA whose confidentiality definition is broad enough to restrict someone's work, is enforceable depends on the common-law reasonableness test from BDO Seidman v. Hirshberg, 93 N.Y.2d 382 (1999): no broader than necessary to protect a legitimate employer interest, no undue hardship on the employee, and not injurious to the public.
- 4
A 2023 bill to ban most non-compete agreements statewide, Senate Bill S3100A, passed both the Senate and Assembly in June 2023 but was vetoed by Governor Kathy Hochul on December 22, 2023, and never became law.
- 5
Because New York has no dedicated trade secret statute, there is no dedicated statute of limitations for misappropriation either. Courts generally apply the state's general three-year limitations period for injury to property under CPLR 214.
- 6
New York has one narrow, industry-specific non-compete statute: Labor Law Section 202-k, the Broadcast Employees Freedom to Work Act, bars broadcasting employers from restricting on-air or off-air, non-management employees from working elsewhere after their employment ends.
- 7
Mutual NDAs, where both sides share confidential information, and one-way NDAs, where only one side does, are both ordinary enforceable contracts in New York; which one fits depends on whether the exchange runs both directions, like a partnership or acquisition discussion, or one direction, like pitching an investor.
- 8
A New York court can order injunctive relief to stop an ongoing or threatened breach of a valid NDA, in addition to any damages the disclosure caused.
Key decisions before you file
Before you file a Non-Disclosure Agreement in New York, a few decisions shape the document: which option to choose and what each one means. The Non-Disclosure Agreement guide walks through them.
Open the Non-Disclosure Agreement guideCustomize your Non-Disclosure Agreement Template with DocDraft
New York Requirements for Non-Disclosure Agreement
Definition of Confidential Information (New York common law, Ashland Management Inc. v. Janien; Defend Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 1839)
New York has never adopted a trade secret statute, so what counts as confidential information under state law comes entirely from the Court of Appeals' six-factor common-law test in Ashland Management Inc. v. Janien. Under federal law, the Defend Trade Secrets Act's definitions, including 'trade secret,' appear at 18 U.S.C. Section 1839, while Section 1836 is the Act's separate civil-cause-of-action section.
Trade Secret Protection (New York common law, Ashland Management Inc. v. Janien; Defend Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 1836)
Trade secrets New York recognizes under its common-law standard remain protected for as long as they stay secret, a common-law principle rooted in Ashland Management Inc. v. Janien rather than a statutory one. 18 U.S.C. Section 1836 is accurately cited here as the Defend Trade Secrets Act provision creating a federal civil cause of action for misappropriation, available alongside the state common-law claim.
Exclusions from Confidential Information (New York common law principles of contract interpretation)
Specifies information not considered confidential under New York law, such as publicly available information, information independently developed, or information rightfully received from third parties.
Whistleblower Protection (Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016, 18 U.S.C. Section 1833(b))
Includes immunity provisions for confidential disclosure of trade secrets to government officials or attorneys for reporting suspected violations of law, as required by federal law.
Term of Confidentiality (New York common law reasonableness test, BDO Seidman v. Hirshberg, 93 N.Y.2d 382 (1999))
Specifies that the duration of confidentiality obligations must be reasonable. Duration reasonableness in New York is assessed under the common-law test from BDO Seidman v. Hirshberg, which weighs time and geographic scope alongside the employer's legitimate interest.
Statute of Limitations (New York Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) Section 213)
Acknowledges the six-year statute of limitations for breach of contract claims in New York, which would apply to NDA violations.
Governing Law (New York General Obligations Law Section 5-1401)
Specifies New York law as the governing law for the agreement, which is enforceable under New York's choice of law principles.
Jurisdiction and Venue (New York General Obligations Law Section 5-1402; New York Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) Section 501)
General Obligations Law Section 5-1402 lets a party consent to New York jurisdiction for contract disputes, but only for transactions covering at least one million dollars in the aggregate. CPLR Section 501 separately enforces any written venue-fixing agreement on a motion to change venue, with no dollar threshold. Both citations are accurate but describe two distinct mechanisms, not one uniform rule.
Remedies for Breach (New York Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) Article 63)
Outlines remedies for breach including injunctive relief, which is recognized under New York law for confidentiality breaches where monetary damages may be inadequate.
Liquidated Damages (New York common law on liquidated damages; Truck Rent-A-Center v. Puritan Farms 2nd, Inc., 41 N.Y.2d 420 (1977))
If included, must be reasonable and not constitute a penalty under New York law, which scrutinizes liquidated damages provisions.
Electronic Signatures (New York Electronic Signatures and Records Act (ESRA); Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (E-SIGN), 15 U.S.C. Section 7001)
Acknowledges that electronic signatures are valid and enforceable under both New York and federal law.
Severability (New York common law principles of contract severability)
Provides that if any provision is found unenforceable under New York law, the remainder of the agreement remains in effect, consistent with New York contract interpretation principles.
No Implied Licenses (New York common law; federal intellectual property laws)
Clarifies that no intellectual property licenses are granted by implication, which aligns with New York intellectual property law principles.
Relationship of Parties (New York Partnership Law Section 10; New York common law on agency relationships)
Establishes that the NDA does not create any agency, partnership, or joint venture relationship under New York law.
Entire Agreement (New York common law parol evidence rule)
States that the NDA constitutes the entire agreement between the parties regarding confidentiality, consistent with New York's parol evidence rule.
Modification (New York General Obligations Law Section 15-301)
Requires that modifications to the NDA be in writing and signed by all parties, in accordance with New York's Statute of Frauds.
Waiver (New York common law principles regarding waiver)
Specifies that failure to enforce any provision does not constitute waiver of future rights, consistent with New York contract law principles.