to impair the Government’s ability to obtain necessary information in the future; or (2) to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the person from whom the information was obtained.” National Parks and Conservation Ass’n v. Morton, 498 F.2d 765, 770 (D.C.Cir.1974). Of course, the mere fact that information falls within a FOIA exemption does not of itself bar an agency from disclosing the information. Chrysler Corp. v. Brown, 441 U.S. 281, 293, 99 S.Ct. 1705, 1713, 60 L.Ed.2d 208 (1979). But we have held that information falling within Exemption 4 of FOIA also comes within the Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1905, which prohibits the disclosure of, inter alia, “trade secrets” and “confidential statistical data.” CNA Fin. Corp. v. Donovan, 830 F.2d 1132, 1151 (D.C.Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 977, 108 S.Ct. 1270,
holding that the freedom of information acts exemption 5 usc  552b4 of trade secrets does not create an independent right to prevent disclosure holding that foia exemption 4 did not apply because agency did not meet burden of showing that desired information consisted of trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person that are privileged or confidential holding that the scope of the trade secrets act is at least coextensive with that of exemption 4 of foia holding that the loss of trade secrets cannot be measured in money damages holding that supplier lists can be trade secrets under indianas uniform trade secrets act which uses the same definition of a trade secret as montana