Colameta used customer information that he took from Protégé. Additionally, Colameta admits to having taken at least two Protégé proposals with him to Monument. This type of information may constitute trade secrets. See G.L.c. 266, §30 (defining “trade secret” as used in G.L.c. 93, §42, as including “anything tangible or intangible or electronically kept or stored, which constitutes, represents, evidences or records a secret scientific, technical, merchandising, production or management information, design, process, procedure, formula, invention or improvement”); Warner-Lambert Co., 427 Mass. at 49 (“ [Confidential and proprietary business information may be entitled to protection, even if such information cannot claim trade secret protection”); see, e.g., Augat, Inc., 409 Mass. at 173 (<HOLDING>). “Matters of public knowledge or of general
recognizing that even if a plaintiff claims certain information constitutes trade secrets its claim may not depend on that determination holding that included among trade secrets employee may not appropriate from employer is certain information such as lists of customers 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 recognizing that customer lists may be protectable trade secrets recognizing a legitimate need to protect an employee from disclosing an employers trade secrets or other confidential information to a competitor