A person disclosed a business idea to the other side during negotiations for cooperation to realize such idea and later claimed that the counterparty has undertaken not to implement the idea by itself. The negotiations failed and the counterparty realized the idea by itself.
The Court held that imitation or copying of a product that is not considered intellectual property under the law does not create a right under the unjust enrichment law unless the copying constitutes a tort or is a violation of trust relationship or a trade secret. Nevertheless, copying an idea disclosed during negotiation may establish a cause of action.
The Court dismissed the case after determining that the idea was not unique or innovative and did not constitute an intellectual property. In addition, it was not proven that any attempt was made to demand execution of a confidentiality agreement or exclusivity, no record was made of the counterparty's alleged commitment to confidentiality and it was not proven that a commitment was made orally.