What is the legal force of the "confidential" label?

A journalist obtains from an inside contact a company document stamped "confidential" and containing information about final decisions to close some of the firm's departments. What's is the legal force of the 'confidential' label? the answer must illustrate how conclusions are reached in the light of the laws of confidentiality
Thanks very much if you can help
Answer:
None to the journalist.
The document carries that as an identifier to those
who have signed a confidentiality agreement with the company.
The label it's self is meaningless. It's the agreement which refers to it that is binding.

---

(First, this is a general understanding of U.S. law. If you have a particular issue, SEEK A LAWYER RIGHT AWAY, as disclosure of business information may be enjoined or other immediate relief may be granted.)


Well, what do you mean by "legal force"? Who do you want to sue? The journalist?

The journalist could be sued for a number of things, including violation of trade secrets, invasion of privacy, conversion, and any other number of torts if the journalist himself steals, breaks in, or otherwise misappropriates the document. If the journalist _receives_ the document from someone in the company (regardless of whether the person had the authority to give it to him), the options against the journalist are very, very limited (unless the journalist worked in concert or conspired with the inside man).

If an employee gave away the information, there are actions that could be taken against the employee (trade secrets, conversion, etc.).

I'm assuming this "confidential" document is just confidential in the corporate sense -- that is, it's just a business document that incorporates a business secret -- and that it's not confidential pursuant to a court order, or a governmental "top secret" document (where the journalist or the employee may or may not be in contempt of court for disclosure or have violated state or federal criminal law for disclosing a governmental secret).

Now, after all of that, your question seems to be-- if the document has the word "CONFIDENTIAL" stamped on it, can the journalist (or the inside man) be sued if the contents are disclosed?

Yes and no. Adding the word "confidential" demonstrates that the company is treating the information contained as a trade secret. If the company actually protects the information, then disclosure can be actionable under the state's relevant Trade Secrets Act. "Confidential" helps demonstrate that the document is a scret. (However, if the document was willingly given to a reporter, the information is no longer a secret, and the reporter can't be held liable for publishing it.)

But there is no law that says a journalist cannot publish "confidential" information. In fact, that's oftentimes what journalists try to find and publish. Once again, the issues change if the journalist comes into your office and steals the document, but then there may be liablity regardless of whether the word "confidential" is posted.