## Facts

- Forest Park Pictures and its creators developed a television series concept titled “Housecall” about a doctor expelled from the medical community for treating patients who could not pay, who relocates to Malibu and becomes a concierge doctor for wealthy clients.
- Plaintiffs reduced the concept to a written “series treatment” containing character biographies, themes, and storylines, and sent it to a USA Network executive.
- USA Network scheduled and held a meeting for the purpose of hearing plaintiffs’ pitch.
- Plaintiffs alleged USA Network knew that, in the entertainment industry, ideas are pitched with the expectation of compensation if used.
- USA Network later rejected the “Housecall” concept.
- In 2009, USA Network premiered “Royal Pains,” a series with a substantially similar premise involving a doctor who becomes a concierge doctor to wealthy residents after being expelled for treating patients unable to pay.
- Plaintiffs filed a single claim for breach of an implied-in-fact contract, alleging USA Network used their idea without paying.

## Issues

1. Whether the Copyright Act preempts a state-law claim for breach of an implied-in-fact contract to pay for use of a pitched television series idea that was embodied in a written treatment.
2. Whether plaintiffs adequately pleaded an enforceable implied-in-fact contract, including sufficiently definite terms, to survive a motion to dismiss.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit vacated the district court’s dismissal and remanded.
- The court held the claim satisfied the Copyright Act’s subject-matter prong because the treatment fell within the subject matter of copyright.
- The court held the claim was not preempted because it included an “extra element”: an implied promise to pay reasonable compensation if the idea were used.
- The court further held plaintiffs adequately pleaded an implied-in-fact contract; questions about reasonable compensation and other details were not resolved at the pleading stage.

## Legal Principles

- Copyright Act preemption under 17 U.S.C. § 301 requires (1) the work to fall within the subject matter of copyright and (2) the state-law right to be equivalent to rights protected by 17 U.S.C. § 106.
- A state-law claim is preempted if it alleges acts that would infringe exclusive copyright rights and lacks an additional element making the claim qualitatively different from infringement.
- Contract claims (including implied-in-fact contracts) generally avoid preemption when they depend on mutual assent and a voluntarily assumed obligation, such as a promise to pay for use.
- In idea-submission disputes, allegations of industry custom and the circumstances of a pitch can support an implied-in-fact promise to compensate if the recipient uses the idea.
- A pleaded entitlement to payment for use of an idea is distinct from a claim seeking to control copying of protected expression.

## Conclusion

The Second Circuit held that an implied-in-fact contract claim seeking reasonable compensation for the use of a pitched television series idea is not preempted by the Copyright Act when the claim turns on an alleged promise to pay, and it reinstated the complaint for further proceedings.


Forest Park Pictures v. Universal Television Network, Inc., 683 F.3d 424 (2d Cir. 2012)