> That decision is about if something can be both a trade secret and copyrighted.

I think you completely made up this part. My reading is that court said that Capricorn failed to met criteria to establish trade secret and even violation didn't happen at all. Also, it was district court ruling which doesn't establish any case law.

* Capricorn did not treat Supercede as confidential.

* merely listed functionalities of Supercede and did not allege how such functionalities constituted a unique trade secret.

* DePace, Capricorn's primary coder of Supercede, did not believe Defendants had copied Supercede,