Skip to main content
Menu

Current Events

No One Will Ever Suspect!

Here’s another one of those “Let’s lift a bunch of material from the company we work for and start our own!” schemes:

According to the indictment, Yu Xue and Lucy Xi were scientists working at GSK’s research facility in Upper Merion, Pa., when they engaged in an alleged scheme to steal trade secrets related to GSK research data, procedures, and manufacturing processes for biopharmaceutical products. Many of the biopharmaceutical products they allegedly targeted were designed to treat cancer or other serious diseases.

Yu Xue, Tao Li, and Yan Mei allegedly formed a corporation in China, called Renopharma, to market and sell the trade secret information. The indictment further alleged that in order to hide the proceeds of the crime, Yu Xue, Tao Li, and Yan Mei agreed to title the proceeds in the name of Yu Xue’s sister, Tian Xue, and other family members.

I suppose there’s no good way of knowing if any of these plans ever work, but there are numerous examples of ones that haven’t. Some of this is done one a larger scale, too, of course (discussion here). My guess is that the bigger ones tend to bring a worthwhile return to those sponsoring them, while the smaller enterpreneurs tend to end up talking to the FBI, but I have no data to back that up.

11 comments on “No One Will Ever Suspect!”

  1. Anon says:

    No One Will Ever Suspect … unless you sign it all over to your own sister.

    Doh!

  2. Rooby Doo says:

    And they would have gotten away with it if it weren’t for those meddling kids!

  3. anchor says:

    Rain or shine, the best never rest! Nothing can stop these bunch moving forward and If required, they go an extra mile to reach the destination of success. Hail to the USA!

  4. Anonymous says:

    What about innocent until proven guilty. I felt Chinese scientists are intentionally mortified in current US political and economical situations.

    Nobody ever talked about those wrongfully accused.

    http://blogs.wsj.com/pharmalot/2014/12/08/wire-fraud-charges-against-former-lilly-scientists-are-dismissed/

    1. anonymous2 says:

      “What about innocent until proven guilty.” -Agreed.

      “I felt Chinese scientists are intentionally mortified” -None of the commenters have commented on nationality (at least this time, at least so far).

      (I don’t think mortified is the word you’re after, but I know what you mean)

      1. Roget says:

        Some other phrases that I might replace with ‘intentionally mortified’:

        excessively demonized, immediately implicated, automatically scapegoated etc etc

        Each of these is slightly different, but I feel that at least one might fit Anonymous’ intended meaning

        1. a random guy says:

          Mortify is an intransitive verb. You can be mortified, but you can’t mortify someone else. You can, however, humiliate, embarrass, shame, discredit, demean, degrade, or denigrate others. <(^_^)~

  5. hypnos says:

    Seriously, who is going to pay (a lot of) money for something like this? A bunch of data from a shady organisation claiming that its legit and was stolen from big pharma X? How do you know that is not just a sample of random molecules combined with some equally random IC50s? If I send you a structure and claim that it’s a hot compound from a project targeting Y, it will take you quite some time and money to find out that it is actually not.

    And even if it was real stolen data: How much would one really want to pay for an insoluble comound class with a CYP problem that is active on some vaguely validated target? Any decent pharma company could come up with something like that without much help.

  6. JD says:

    You gotta love that they threw up an IP protection section on their website.

    “At Renopharma Inc. LTD, we understand that IP is our client’s most valuable asset. We adopted the best practices to protect your IP throughout the entire drug R&D life cycle, targeting all potential IP leakage starting from the initial Confidential Agreement even before the first talk hasn’t started…”

    1. Anon says:

      Change “protect” to “steal” and it’s spot on … maybe that’s what they meant?

  7. Wheels17 says:

    I was involved in one of these cases a while back. In our case, there was a fake Chinese company to trap one of our retirees who was trying to sell information. There’s even an autogenerated wikipedia page about the incident:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_Kodak_Co_v._Harold_Worden

    It also dragged 3M in, and Kodak got a nice settlement that I really can’t talk about.
    From “Economic Espionage and Industrial Spying” By Hedieh Nasheri

    In August 1997, Worden pleaded guilty in the U.S. District Court to selling Kodak’s trade secrets to competitors, and he received a 1-year prison sentence. At the sentencing hearing on November 13, 1997, the judge had some special remarks prepared for Mr. Worden regarding his criminal conduct. The remarks were particularly striking in that the judge indicated that his personal preference was for an upward departure from the Federal Sentenctng Guidelines; however, he would accede to the lesser terms of the plea agreement as long as Worden agreed to completely cooperate with the investigation that was ongoing regarding damage done to the Kodak company.

    In December 1997, Kodak concluded that putting Mr. Worden behind bars was not sufficient, and accordingly, the company filed a lawsuit against 3M and one of its Italian subsidiaries, and the Imation Corporation, which had purchased some of 3M’s film-making secrets and assets during the time that Worden Enterprises, Inc., was actively selling Kodak trade secrets to them. When the lawsuit was filed, officials of 3M and Imation refused to comment on the allegations of federal racketeering laws that had been allegedly violated by and through Worden’s company, especialiy issues regarding technology transfer of the development of the “401 machine.”

Comments are closed.