Prosecutors are trying to put a figure on the monetary damage suffered by Corning Inc. in a corporate spying case related to its flat screen substrates. The question is of vital importance to Yeong C….
Prosecutors are trying to put a figure on the monetary damage suffered by Corning Inc. in a corporate spying case related to its flat screen substrates. The question is of vital importance to Yeong C. Lin, who admitted buying stolen Corning proprietary data for use by a Taiwanese company. Mr. Lin, of Fountain Valley, California, is scheduled to be sentenced on 11 June 2008 in US District Court in Rochester, New York for his role in the case. For his guilty plea to a federal conspiracy charge on 12 June 2007, Mr. Lin received a guarantee from prosecutors that he would receive no more than five years in prison. But he also faces a fine of up to USD 250,000, or twice the amount of Corning Inc.“s monetary loss, or both. The secret data, which Mr. Lin bought for USD 34,000 from a Corning Inc. employee in Harrodsburg, Kentucky, involved the company“s patented “fusion draw” process for glass forming. The process was patented in 1961 and was used to develop photochromic lenses, amongst other products. However, the company“s major success with the fusion draw process has been the production of flat-panel glass for liquid crystal displays. Since the slump in its telecommunications business early in this decade, Corning has relied on the specialty glass for a substantial part of its income and nearly all its profits. The question that prosecutors are asking is how much money Corning Inc. lost as a result of the theft of documents that Mr. Lin and others have admitted. The figure they have in mind is more than USD 50 million; Mr. Lin disputes this sum, but has offered no estimate of his own. The number is important because it will affect the length of Mr. Lin“s sentence and the size of his fine. If the judge accepts that estimate, Mr. Lin could in theory face a fine of twice that amount, or more than USD 100 million. Judge Charles J. Siragusa is not expected to fine Mr. Lin USD 100 million. There is little prospect that the defendant, who was paid USD 4,000 a month by the Taiwanese company for his work as a consultant, could pay such a figure. However, the determination of how much the corporate spying cost Corning Inc. will determine how how much Mr. Lin has to find to pay for his misdeeds.