Guys, you are completely right, of course the legal text wont help in all cases but it will make some people think twice to steal stuff blatantly.
What has not been mentioned before is that this report is from the same archie firm that worked at Cruden Bay before me, and in their time put new tees in for the 9th hole but did not alter the hole at all as is indicated now in their report. Nor did they ever recommend to move the 9 th green or the 10 th tees to right at that time. Same with lowering the 16th green entrance.
Then I start working with the club, do some things such as redo the green entrance at 14 and the new par 3 hole, and then also suggest to move the fairway of 9 to the left edge, move the green of 9 to the location of the 10 th tees and move the 10th tees to the right into the valley to create a diagonal tee shot. I take the greens chairman to the new spot, they love it. They clear the left gorse on 9 but nothing gets done further because the club was losing 60 k a year in at that time due to the crisis.
Fast forward to 2014 and I get a report made by the same archie firm that worked at Cruden before me, al of a sudden now having pretty much the same ideas I gave the club in 2008 on holes 9 and 10 (plus including the lowering of the entrance of green 16). Of course they could have had a bright new insight which they did not have when they last worked on the exact same holes, leading to pretty much the same plan I had proposed earlier. Or maybe the club told them about this great idea.... who knows.
In any case in my view conceptual ideas do have huge value, that's for instance why Doaks routings are so sought after. And those who can create the best conceptual ideas will always do well in the end, even if some of their ideas get nicked once in a while.