About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

56 J. Pat. Off. Soc'y 648 (1974)
The Legal Rights of the Employed Inventor: New Approaches to Old Problems - Part I

handle is hein.journals/jpatos56 and id is 674 raw text is: Journal of the Patent Office Society THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF THE Neal Orkin* EMPLOYED INVENTOR: NEW APPROACHES TO OLD PROBLEMS (PART I) INTRODUCTION Throughout the history of the United States, the courts have consistently expanded the rights of the indi- vidual-with one possible exception-the rights of the employed inventor.' Most American employed inven- tors must, as a condition of employment, assign their patent rights to their employers upon commencement of employment. Absent a statutory remedy such as exists in most European countries,2 the American employed inventor presently has no administrative or judicial remedy to obtain compensation beyond his salary for his labors; in most cases, his only additional compensation is a possible token grant from his employer. It is the purpose of this paper to present four differ- ent approaches to employed inventor rights in the United States: (1) the status or common law approach which exists in the absence of a contract of assignment between employee and employer; (2) the contractual approach in which the employee assigns future patent rights to his employer through a contractual agreement; (3) the legislative approach in which employees are granted compensation through statutorily decreed schemes; and (4) a constitutional approach to employed * Student, Temple Univ. School of Law, Operations Research Analyst, Naval Air Development Center, Warminister, Pennsylvania. 1 Courts have to some extent expanded employed inventor rights, but only in areas in which agreements such as trailer clause contracts have been used to hinder the individual from freely making a living or changing employers. Courts have largely ignored other public policy arguments. See for example Guth V. Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co., 72 F.2d 385, (1934), in which the court invalidated por- tions of an agreement in which the provisions were limitless in the extent of time and subject matter; however, the court upheld the other portions of the contract which required the employee to assign to his employer patents produced in the course of employment. 2 See Section III, infra.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most