<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Temporal validity &#8211; Geheimnisblog</title>
	<atom:link href="https://geheimnisblog.de/en/schlagwort/temporal-validity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://geheimnisblog.de</link>
	<description>GeschGehG and Know-How Protection</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2026 17:08:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-GB</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>Last but not least: Appropriate protective measures and duration of validity</title>
		<link>https://geheimnisblog.de/en/last-but-not-least-appropriate-protective-measures-and-duration-of-validity/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Marie-Sarah Boudon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Dec 2021 15:32:01 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Protective measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Confidentiality measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Temporal validity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transposition deadline]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://geheimnisblog.de/?p=1235</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[We’re taking the occasion of the Geheimnisblog’s first New Year to look back on our favorite topic: We’re drawing an interim conclusion regarding how the courts have handled appropriate protective (&#8230;) <a href="https://geheimnisblog.de/en/last-but-not-least-appropriate-protective-measures-and-duration-of-validity/">Read more</a>]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Retroactive application of the obligation to take protective measures? Higher Regional Court of Stuttgart vs. Higher Regional Court of Hamm</title>
		<link>https://geheimnisblog.de/en/retroactive-application-of-the-obligation-to-take-protective-measures-higher-regional-court-of-stuttgart-vs-higher-regional-court-of-hamm/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Marie-Sarah Boudon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2021 09:45:10 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Protective measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Confidentiality measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Temporal validity]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://geheimnisblog.de/?p=1265</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In two very extensive decisions, the Higher Regional Courts of Stuttgart and Hamm &#8211; as far as can be determined &#8211; became the first higher courts to rule on the (&#8230;) <a href="https://geheimnisblog.de/en/retroactive-application-of-the-obligation-to-take-protective-measures-higher-regional-court-of-stuttgart-vs-higher-regional-court-of-hamm/">Read more</a>]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
