## Facts

- Editions Play Bac, S.A. (Play Bac) developed and sold a popular French-language educational question-and-answer game for children.
- Play Bac spent about two years developing its approach for the game, including analyzing children’s textbooks, consulting French teachers, and testing prototypes with French schoolchildren.
- Play Bac approached Western Publishing Company (Western) to discuss licensing an English-language version of Play Bac’s game.
- During the negotiations, Play Bac explained what it called its “game concept” to Western.
- The “game concept” included the game’s packaging design, Play Bac’s marketing strategy, and Play Bac’s approach to selecting the game’s questions and answers.
- The licensing negotiations ended without an agreement.
- After negotiations ended, Western published an English-language children’s game that Play Bac contended had many similarities to Play Bac’s French game.
- Play Bac sued Western in federal district court for trade-secret misappropriation under Wisconsin’s version of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA).
- Play Bac sought an injunction preventing Western from marketing its game.
- Western moved for summary judgment.

## Issues

1. Whether Play Bac’s disclosed “game concept” information—packaging design, marketing strategy, and question-and-answer selection approach—qualified as a trade secret under Wisconsin’s UTSA.
2. Whether the circumstances of the licensing negotiations supported a finding that Western had a duty to keep the disclosed information confidential for purposes of a UTSA misappropriation claim.
3. Whether the summary-judgment record permitted Play Bac to proceed on misappropriation and obtain injunctive relief, or instead entitled Western to judgment as a matter of law.

## Decision

- The court ruled on Western’s motion for summary judgment in Play Bac’s Wisconsin UTSA trade-secret claim, in a case where Play Bac also sought injunctive relief.
- Based on the non-opinion sources available here, the specific outcome of the summary-judgment motion and the request for an injunction cannot be stated reliably.

## Legal Principles

- Under the UTSA, a trade secret generally must (i) derive independent economic value from not being generally known or readily ascertainable and (ii) be the subject of reasonable efforts to maintain its secrecy.
- Information disclosed in licensing discussions may be protected if it is secret, economically valuable because it is secret, and communicated in a setting that supports a confidentiality obligation.
- Misappropriation commonly turns on whether the defendant acquired protected information through improper means or used/disclosed it in breach of a duty to maintain secrecy.
- On summary judgment, the moving party must show there is no genuine dispute of material fact and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law; the nonmoving party must identify evidence that would allow a reasonable factfinder to rule in its favor.
- Injunctive relief in a trade-secret case typically depends on showing a legally protected interest (a qualifying trade secret) and threatened or ongoing use or disclosure that would cause harm not fully addressed by money damages.

## Conclusion

Editions Play Bac v. Western Publishing Co. involves a dispute arising from failed licensing talks for an English-language version of a French children’s educational Q&A game, where Play Bac alleged that Western used confidential elements of Play Bac’s “game concept” (including packaging, marketing, and question-selection approach) to publish a similar English-language game. Play Bac sued under Wisconsin’s UTSA and sought to stop Western’s marketing efforts, and the court addressed Western’s summary-judgment motion, although the specific disposition is not available from the limited sources provided here.


Editions Play Bac v. Western Publishing Co., 1993 WL 541219 (1993)