Maureen, who frequently developed gadgets, had an idea for a machine that could feed her animals (cats, dogs, rabbits, and fish) while she was away on vacation for a week. She was very sure of the idea and began discussions with a manufacturer. Unfortunately, after it was concluded that he could make the machine, they could not agree on his proper compensation and they broke off negotiations. Shortly afterwards, this manufacturer, Easylife Ltd., began to manufacturer "the animal feeder" based on her idea. On these facts, which of the following is true?
A) The manufacturer could not be sued for misuse of a trade secret because he was not Maureen's employee and thus was not in a position of trust and could use the information for his own benefit.
B) The manufacturer could not be sued for misuse of a trade secret because Maureen only told her idea and ideas cannot be protected by trade secret law.
C) The manufacturer could not be sued for misuse of a trade secret because he had not signed any document in which he acknowledged he understood it was confidential information and in which he promised not to use it to her detriment.
D) Maureen could not sue the manufacturer for infringement of copyright but could sue for misuse of a trade secret if she can show that it was apparent in the circumstances that he was being trusted with confidential information.
E) Maureen has no action against the manufacturer because she had not patented her invention.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Trade secrets can be protected without formal agreements if it is clear that the information was shared in confidence and with an expectation of privacy. The fact that Maureen shared her idea with the manufacturer under circumstances that implied trust and confidentiality, such as during negotiations for production, could be sufficient for a trade secret claim, even without a formal non-disclosure agreement.

Maureen, Who Frequently Developed Gadgets, Had an Idea for a Machine