Spilling Secrets: Trade Secret Disclosure and Takings in Offshore Drilling Regulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This Article analyzes whether the mandatory public disclosure of deepwater drilling trade secret information relating to health, safety, and the environment violates the Takings Clause. This issue represents a remarkable intersection of intellectual property, constitutional, land use, environmental, and property law. Industry nondisclosure of proprietary drilling information has been a key contributor to increased risks associated with drilling in both the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska. Yet the Supreme Court in its seminal decision in Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co. held that trade secrets and confidential business information constitute property protected under the Takings Clause of the U.S. Constitution. First, this Article evaluates mandatory public disclosure under the regulatory takings doctrine in light of the Court’s decision in Monsanto and subsequent case law. Second, because an ocean floor leaseholder’s application for a drilling and exploration permit implicates land use, this Article analyzes mandatory public disclosure of proprietary information under the Nollan and Dolan exactions doctrine. Through regulation carefully tailored to certain constraints, as explicated in this Article, the government may indeed compel public disclosure of trade secrets without violating the Constitution.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".