Yes, the doctrine is narrow and should properly only be applied in the rare instance. But its potential as a club against departing employees is considerable and would constitute a material addition to Michigan law. In lieu of an injunction, a court may condition future use of trade secrets on payment of a royalty for no longer than the period of time that the use of the trade secrets could have been prohibited. In addition, in lieu of damages measured by any other methods, the damages caused by misappropriation may be measured by imposition of liability for a reasonable royalty for a misappropriator's unauthorized disclosure or the use of a trade secret. This would also cover a motion to terminate an injunction or resist the motion in bad faith, or where willful and malicious misappropriation exists.
Continued misappropriation constitutes a single act.
The Act also provides that the UTSA shall be applied and construed to effectuate the Act's general purpose to make uniform law with respect to the subject of this act among states enacting it. Thus, although not binding in a technical sense, Michigan jurisprudence regarding the misappropriation of trade secrets is now directly enriched by decisions from 42 other states, as well as federal courts. Overall, the adoption of the UTSA in Michigan would seem to provide the best of both worlds, preserving prior Michigan jurisprudence on the issue while supplementing it in a very tangible manner with decisions from other jurisdictions. Adoption of the Act places the burden on attorneys to have access to and look for supporting case law in other UTSA jurisdictions.