Skip to content
Official Blog of the AALS Section on Contracts

Claim Reinstated in Riggs v. MySpace

In an unpublished memorandum, the Federal Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reinstated Julie Riggs’ claim for beach of an implied-in-fact contract with MySpace in Riggs v. MySpace, Inc.  The laconic Ninth Circuit tells us nothing of the underlying claims.  Here’s the paragarph relating to the implied-in-fact contract claim:

However, the district court improperly dismissed Riggs’s implied-in-fact contract claim, arising from her ideas for a MySpace website devoted to celebrities, because Riggs alleged in her First Amended Complaint at paragraph 120 that she told the News Corporation’s executive’s assistant that she wanted to “sell” her ideas before she disclosed them. See Grosso v. Miramax Film Corp., 383 F.3d 965, 967 (9th Cir. 2004) (under California law, to establish a breach of an implied-in-fact contract for disclosure of an idea, “the plaintiff must show that the plaintiff prepared the work, disclosed the work to the offeree for sale, and did so under circumstances from which it could be concluded that the offeree voluntarily accepted the disclosure knowing the conditions on which it was tendered and the reasonable value of the work”); Desny v. Wilder, 299 P.2d 257, 270 (Cal. 1956) (there may be an implied-in-fact contract “if the idea purveyor has clearly conditioned his offer to convey the idea upon an obligation to pay for it if it is used by the offeree and the offeree, knowing the condition before he knows the idea, voluntarily accepts its disclosure (necessarily on the specified basis) and finds it valuable and uses it”).

Santa Clara Law Prof Eric Goldman posted some helpful information at the time of the District Court’s ruling in the case back in in 2009.  His discussion can be found here.  He has some critical things to say about that ruling that might be of interest to readers interested in the law of the internet.  He also provides this useful background on the case:

Riggs created a MySpace profile that she used to authenticate celebrities’ MySpace pages to distinguish them from the many fake celebrity profiles on MySpace. Her most substantive gripe is that MySpace deleted Riggs’ profile twice, and she claims MySpace was negligent to do so.

9th Circuit

An earlier decision in the case upheld the venue selection clause in MySpace’s user agreement.  The reinstated claim relates to Riggs’ idea for a MySpace page devoted to celebrities.  The Ninth Circuit tells us no more than that.  

[JT]

Posted in: