Mississippi Trade Secret Laws: UTSA, Remedies & Deadlines

Mississippi enacted the Mississippi Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Miss. Code §§ 75-26-1 to 75-26-19, in 1990 to provide a civil framework for trade secret misappropriation claims. The statute closely follows the Uniform Trade Secrets Act model. Claims must be filed within three years of discovery under § 75-26-13.

This guide is part of our Trade Secret Laws by State series.

Information last verified on 2026-06-25. This article presents general legal information, not legal advice. For a full overview of trade secret protections across the country, see Trade Secret Laws by State.

Does Mississippi have a trade secret law?

Mississippi enacted the Mississippi Uniform Trade Secrets Act (MUTSA) in 1990, effective July 1 of that year, codified at Miss. Code §§ 75-26-1 to 75-26-19. The legislature modeled the statute on the Uniform Law Commission's Uniform Trade Secrets Act, placing Mississippi in the large majority of states that use a UTSA-based civil framework for trade secret protection. The MUTSA covers the three recognized forms of civil misappropriation: acquiring a trade secret through improper means, disclosing a trade secret without authorization, and using a trade secret without authorization. Because the statute closely follows UTSA text, case law from other UTSA jurisdictions provides persuasive guidance in Mississippi courts. Federal criminal liability for intentional trade secret theft also remains available under the Economic Espionage Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1831-1832.

What counts as a trade secret and misappropriation in Mississippi?

Section 75-26-3 of the Mississippi Code defines a trade secret as information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that satisfies two conditions.

First, the information must derive independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use.

Second, the information must be subject to efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.

Both conditions must be satisfied. Types of information that have qualified under UTSA case law include customer and pricing data, manufacturing processes, proprietary software, financial models, and business development plans, provided the holder has implemented genuine secrecy measures. Sharing information with employees or business partners under written confidentiality obligations does not destroy trade-secret status, but indiscriminate disclosure can.

Misappropriation under § 75-26-3 means acquiring a trade secret by improper means, which includes theft, bribery, misrepresentation, breach of a duty to maintain secrecy, or inducement of such a breach, or disclosing or using a trade secret without consent by a person who knew or had reason to know the secret was obtained improperly or in breach of a confidentiality obligation. Reverse engineering a product obtained through lawful means and independently developing the same information are not misappropriation under Mississippi law.

Remedies and the limitations period in Mississippi

Section 75-26-5 authorizes courts to issue injunctions to prevent actual or threatened misappropriation. The court may extend an injunction beyond the end of the misappropriation to eliminate any commercial advantage the defendant obtained, and may condition relief on payment of a reasonable royalty when an absolute prohibition would be inequitable.

Section 75-26-7 governs damages. A prevailing claimant may recover actual loss caused by the misappropriation plus the misappropriator's unjust enrichment not already captured in the actual-loss figure, or a reasonable royalty for the period of unauthorized use in lieu of damages. When misappropriation is willful and malicious, the court may award exemplary damages of up to twice the compensatory amount.

Section 75-26-9 provides for attorney fees. The prevailing party may recover fees when a claim or motion was made in bad faith, or when willful and malicious misappropriation is proved.

The limitations period under § 75-26-13 is three years from when the misappropriation was discovered or, through the exercise of reasonable diligence, should have been discovered. Continuing misappropriation constitutes a single claim rather than a series of separate violations, so the limitations clock begins when the first act was or should have been discovered.

How the federal DTSA applies in Mississippi

The federal Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1836-1839, took effect May 11, 2016, and creates a federal civil cause of action when a misappropriated trade secret relates to a product or service used in, or intended for use in, interstate or foreign commerce. Most Mississippi business information meets this threshold. Because the DTSA does not preempt state law (18 U.S.C. § 1838), Mississippi claimants commonly plead MUTSA and DTSA claims in a single lawsuit.

Features of the DTSA that supplement the MUTSA include:

• Ex parte seizure orders: Federal courts may order the immediate seizure of property to prevent propagation of a trade secret in extraordinary circumstances (18 U.S.C. § 1836(b)(2)).
• Whistleblower immunity: An individual who discloses a trade secret solely to report a suspected legal violation to a government official or attorney is immune from DTSA civil and criminal liability (18 U.S.C. § 1833(b)).
• Notice requirement: Confidentiality agreements executed or materially updated after May 11, 2016 must include written notice of this immunity. Omitting the notice forfeits the right to seek exemplary damages and attorney fees in any DTSA action.
• Three-year federal limitations period: The DTSA carries its own three-year limitations period from discovery (18 U.S.C. § 1836(d)), which aligns with Mississippi's state-law period.

Protecting trade secrets in Mississippi: practical steps

Under Mississippi law, reasonable secrecy measures are a definitional element of trade-secret status, not merely best practice. Courts examine whether the holder's protective measures were proportionate to the value and sensitivity of the information.

Recognized protective steps include:

• Written non-disclosure agreements with employees, contractors, and third parties that access sensitive information; agreements executed after May 11, 2016 should include the DTSA whistleblower-immunity notice
• Role-based access controls and encryption for digital systems and files containing proprietary information
• Physical security for facilities and documents that contain sensitive materials
• Clear and consistent confidentiality labeling on documents, files, and presentations
• Structured offboarding procedures that revoke system access, recover devices, and remind departing employees of continuing confidentiality obligations

Mississippi courts, consistent with most UTSA jurisdictions, look unfavorably on inconsistent protection. Selectively guarding information against some parties while sharing it openly with others undermines trade-secret status. Documented and consistent measures carry far more weight than ad hoc or retrospective ones.

This article presents general legal information as of 2026-06-25 and is not legal advice. Laws change, and individual circumstances vary. Consult a lawyer licensed in Mississippi for guidance on your specific situation.

Related articles

• Trade Secret Laws by State
• Missouri Trade Secret Laws
• Minnesota Trade Secret Laws
• Is AI-generated code copyright infringement?

Last updated: 2026-06-25.