As with most contracts, Parker’s contract with Jackson called for him to receive money, $25,000 plus expenses. In exchange, Parker conducted research on Jackson’s opponent. Thus, the agreement meets the consideration element of contract law.
Meeting of the Minds or Mutual Assent
In order for a contract to be valid, both sides must fully understand the details, rights, and obligations within. Parker’s contract with Jackson clearly delineated each party’s duties under the contract, demonstrating mutual assent.
Parker’s contract with Jackson satisfied all three elements of a valid contract, so it can be said the contract is valid.
The contract states in plain language that the research Parker conducted for Jackson cannot be used “for any other purpose, campaign, or person,” and that it could only be used “during the present campaign cycle.” Such a contract means that the two parties involved were to maintain its terms only between themselves and not share any information with a third party. If the State Academy of Trial Lawyers had attempted to buy the research from Parker during the same campaign cycle, it would clearly have been a breach of contract for Parker to sell that information, but since the Academy is attempting to purchase the research for the next election, Parker is well within his rights, as laid out in the contract, to sell the information to the Academy because the contract said only that the Jackson’s campaign could not use the information in the future, not that Parker could not.
The next issue that Parker had to face was a possible violation of federal copyright law. Copyrights protect original wo
...