“[I]t cannot be understated that the application of trade secret doctrine to the unique facts of this case is unchartered territory.” On September 26, 2025 U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen of the Eastern District of New York acknowledged the unprecedented nature of her ruling that Martin Shkreli, the former owner of the exclusive album created by the legendary hip-hop collective Wu-Tang Clan, may have misappropriated the trade secret of the music. Trade secret protection generally applies to highly confidential business information like secret recipes, customer lists or formulas — anything that derives monetary value from being not generally known. But, as Wu-Tang’s Ghostface Killah noted in “Can it Be All So Simple,” “times is changed and life is strange.”

The facts of this case are unquestionably unique. Wu-Tang Clan produced only one vinyl copy of the album, “Once Upon a Time in Shaolin,” as a commentary on the growing ubiquity of the digital music industry and its “devaluation” of music. Shkreli then purchased the album in 2015 for $2 million and signed an agreement not to duplicate the work or use it commercially for 88 years. PleasrDAO, a decentralized autonomous organization that collects physical and digital art, purchased the album for $4.75 million from the government, as it was among the assets seized in forfeiture proceedings following Shkreli’s securities fraud conviction.

However, according to PleasrDAO’s complaint filed in 2024, Shkreli continued to claim that he owned the music, and he proceeded to share the album via download and played it on social media livestreams. The complaint alleged that Shkreli’s actions amounted to trade secret misappropriation and violations of the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act. Shkreli filed a motion for dismissal of PleasrDAO’s claims, which Judge Chen granted in part while preserving the trade secret claims.

Judge Chen found that the album met some key elements for trade secret protection due to its secrecy, secure handling and unique value derived from exclusivity. Despite previous courts rejecting similar claims for unreleased music by other artists, Judge Chen highlighted PleasrDAO’s distinct business model of monetizing cultural exclusivity as economically significant. Legal experts noted that while this case may be difficult to replicate, it opens the door for artists and creators in other industries to explore trade secret protections if proper safeguards are in place. Ultimately, the ruling supports the idea that exclusivity itself can be a valuable, protectable asset in the evolving landscape of art distribution.