Reversed in favor of Metallurgical
i. Metallurgical took enough steps to keep the secret by hiding the location of the furnaces and only allowing access to authorized employees, requiring non-disclosure agreements to anyone who learns about the T.S.
ii. Subjective belief in the worth of the secret, as demonstrated by efforts to protect the secret, is sufficient to show the secret is real
iii. Secrecy need not be absolute, only sufficient to prevent competitors from easily discovering the trade secret → the limited disclosure to the two manufacturing companies, even if outside of a confidential agreement, does not render the secret public because of the purpose of the relationship being in furtherance of the plaintiff’s economic interests
1. A confidential relationship would have been better, but its absence is not dispositive
iv. The secret process added economic value, and Metallurgical had significant costs to develop the T.S.