Inventions Made By Employees

The following scenario is quite common: a business has a smart, creative employee who finds the time and has the inclination to tinker with the company’s products or manufacturing processes. Perhaps he works at this project on his own time in the shop, or maybe he does it at home. Finally, he has a breakthrough and comes up with a process or an improvement to a machine that dramatically reduces his employer’s cost of manufacturing. Or, maybe his idea results in a better product for his employer’s customers.
With respect to the new device or process, does the invention become the property of the employer or of the employee? The employee used his initiative, but he used the employer’s resources, and even if he used his own tools and time he would never have begun to work on the project if he had not been exposed to it through his employment in the first place.
Who owns any forthcoming patent to the new device or process? It’s not a simple answer and depends on a number of factors. If, after reading over this information, you still have questions. Please call us to talk about your specific situation.

Who Owns the IP?

The general rule is that, in the absence of an agreement to the contrary, an employer is entitled to a nonexclusive license to use an invention devised by an employee while he or she was working for the employer. In the context of patents, the foregoing rule is referred to as the “shopright doctrine.”

Although the employer is afforded a nonexclusive license to use the invention without paying royalties to the employee, the invention actually is owned by the employee. This employee has the right to exploit it commercially, typically by selling or licensing it to other users. Even where the employee works on the invention on his own time, this rule usually applies if the employer’s resources are used to any significant extent.

A wholly different situation is presented, however, where the employee is engaged by the employer to develop and work on the invention that later becomes the subject of a patent. For example, an employee is engaged by his employer to work on a device that later becomes the subject of the employee’s patent. The employer seeks to obtain an assignment and transfer of the patent, arguing that the employee had invented the device in question while employed precisely to work on the device that became the subject of the patent.

A court would conclude that while the employment relationship itself does not preclude an employee from making improvements to his employer’s processes and obtaining patents for those improvements, if an employee’s job involves inventing or devising such improvements, any resulting patents belong to the employer. Basically, the employee is merely doing what he or she was hired to do.

Legal Rights For IP and Patents

Patents can only be conferred by the federal Patent Office, not by any state. But once the patent has been issued the rights to the patent are decided under state law. In many cases, an employer will obtain from an employee an agreement to assign any patents developed while working on the employer’s business. Those kinds of agreements generally are enforceable. Even in the absence of such an agreement, the employer still may compel the employee to transfer the patent to the employer if the employee was hired to work on the project from which the invention resulted.

The rules pertaining to employee inventions are not limited to patents, but apply to other kinds of intellectual property rights. In one case, for example, university professors devised a process for producing milk by introducing beneficial bacteria. Later, milk produced using this process was sold under a certain trademark that the university owned and licensed to dairies. The university declined to pay royalties to the professors who claimed to be the inventors of the process that led to the trademark, so the professors brought suit against the university.

The court concluded that the trademark belonged to the university, as the professors’ employer, and that there was no obligation on the part of the university to pay royalties to the individual inventors. Importantly, the court found that the professors, when they were conducting the research that led to the invention or development of the trademarked process, were doing precisely what they had been hired to do.

Invention Lawyer Free Consultation

When you need help with inventions made by emcall Ascent Law for your free intellectual property law consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.