The New York Times has a story today about a supposed increase in "idea theft" cases in the wake of the 2004 Ninth Circuit decision in Grosso v. Miramax, which held the Copyright Act did not preempt claims of an implied contract to purchase an idea. I've never understood why anyone thought Grosso was such a big deal. It was always the case that contract claims were not preempted by the Copyright Act; the trouble was (and remains) proving you had a contract (express or implied), and Grosso is no help on that score (in fact, Grosso's case was itself dismissed on just that ground earlier this month, which the Times story mentions in passing but for some reason finds "odd").
It was also never clear to me why Grosso was supposed to be a big victory for writers. As law prof Mike Madison said at the time:
"More practically speaking, it’s hard for me to see how this is a win for screenwriters. Any competent production company stopped opening unsolicited packages a long, long time ago out of fear of this kind of suit. Now executives will run, not walk, from anyone who even looks like a writer. Exactly how does this make writers better off?"
