Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Employee Patent Compensations?

Posted by Cliff on from the if-you-invent-do-it-on-your-own-time dept.

Anonymous Coward asks: "My employer has recently filed a patent application for something I invented. As compensation I am being given the statutory $1 for the assignment and a shiny brass plaque if the patent(s) is awarded. Is this typical for North American companies? I did sign a no compensation and automatic assignment type employment contract and while I was willing to accept that technically, I'm owed nothing, this strikes me as cheap, greedy, and backward thinking on my employers part. I've Google'd and read and this action seems archaic, am I wrong and just full of myself? Your thoughts please!"

9 of 89 comments (clear)

  1. not exactly standard... by jrstewart · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think the usual practice in america is more like a couple thousand dollars and a shiny brass plaque.

    I wouldn't lose sleep over the bonus. Instead, remember to mention your patent at your next performance review. Even if you don't get a bonus from it directly it may be a useful bargaining chip for future compensation.

  2. Standard Practice by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's a standard part of US employment law that if you are indeed an employee rather than an independent contractor that any intellecual property that you generate does in fact belong lock stock and barrel to your employer. They don't even owe you the shiny dollar.

    Some companies are more generous, offering a few shares of stock or whatever.

    I know in Europe you have a somewhat better situation, especially if the invention is worth a LOT of money in the long run, but how far that goes I don't know.

    I never thought it was a big deal in my job - generating these things was what I was being paid for, and in reality very few patents ever turn out to be commercially valuable anyway.

    1. Re:Standard Practice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      Gather round, folks. Take a good look. Once again we see the dangers of lumping together all sorts of things under the phrase "intellectual property."

      See this pathetic moron ? He just said " It's a standard part of US employment law that if you are indeed an employee rather than an independent contractor that any intellecual property that you generate does in fact belong lock stock and barrel to your employer." Of course he probably meant to say that is was standard part of Copyright Law to treat "works done for hire" separately from other works. With that vague mush of ideas about tradmarks, patents, copyrights, and whatever legal fiction he heard in the coffeeroom buzzing around in his head, he probably doesn't even realize that a patent can only be received if and individual or individuals, flesh entities, sign a statement under penalty of perjury to the effect that "I, _____, did invent a . . .". All this "employer owns patents" stuff purely comes as a result between a contract between you are your employer, subject to all the uncertainties of contract law without even getting into the additional problems the employment relationship brings into it.

      It's pretty standard for an employment contract to require you to assist in every manner possible in getting any patents. However they can't require you to break the law, i.e., perjure yourself on the patent affadavit. If you don't think you are getting any economic benefit out it, don't sign it; let them fire you and in the ensuing dispute tell the judge they required you to submit a false document to the Federal Government as a condition of your employment. They try to convince the judge they know the statement is true.

      Another fun one is when management tries to hand out signature spots on the patent as resume perks or spirit awards to various people not involved in the invention. As the parent poster noted, most patents don't amount to beans; but if such a patent gets disputed, and the opposing team is tipped off, they haul up the a few of the signatories on the patent into depositions, squeeze them a bit, and walk away laughing. It usually never hits the courtroom in those cases.

      I know of 2 people who perjured themselves on patent applications as resume builders. Both shit bricks when I gave them copies of this book, thus driving home the reality of what they had done, right after the company was purchased by a larger one known for it's patent litigation.

      However, I have never heard of anyone actually getting a felony conviction for lying on a patent. Personally, I think that should change. Six months in medium security sounds about right.

  3. Re:Companies are tyrannies by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2, Informative

    Furthermore, if democracy is so grand, why aren't companies democratic? As well, if this is a republic, why don't we own our workplaces.

    More than 50% of working Americans own stock in publically traded companies. That stock usually comes with voting rights for the owners. This makes companies both owned by the workers, and democratic.

  4. Contractors aren't real people by bsmoor01 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Where I work, it's made pretty clear that contractors aren't real people. Nowhere is this more evident than the patent-compensation system. 'Real' employees get a $2,500 bonus. After 5 patents, I believe it's a $10,000 bonus. Not bad. Contractors get NOTHING. Not even a plaque. A guy who works in the same lab as I do has his name on 3 patents, and he has never gotten any recognition whatsoever.

    So... don't expect anything for a patent unless you have an agreement guaranteeing compensation. Companies don't give a crap about their employees anymore, and just want to use you up until they can find an Indian/Philipino to replace you for 1/5 the cost.

  5. Re:Motivations by Kanagawa · · Score: 3, Informative
    Because its good for business?

    They should give more than the minimum to give this very valuable employee solid motivation to continue his fine work. Nikola Tesla came to the U.S. to work for Edison, who made life unpleasant by failing to reward Tesla for his excellent work. Tesla eventually left and invented A/C dynamos for Westinghouse, which helped him defeat Edison in the electricty market. Eventually making the Westinghouse corporation became so powerful J.P. Morgan and G.E. eventually gave up competing (and licensed the patents from Westinghouse).

    Sadly, Edison was too arrogant to see the value in Tesla's future efforts and, rather than reaping the benefits of a lifetime's creative inventions and a potentially brilliant partnership, he was massively defeated in the electrical market. There's actually a great new book out called Empires of Light, in case you want to learn from history by reading about it.

    Anyway, filing a patent is normally worth hundreds of thousands of dollars in equity to a corporation. Even, frankly, if the patent isn't really worth enforcing or developing, it still increases the value of the corporation. An employee who is creative enough to continue developing patents is an employee I'd be interested in keeping!

    As a technologist and a manager, I'm often saddened at the short-sightedness of my peers. These kinds of decisions are legal. But, they're cultural suicide for a corporation. Imagine the bright young engineer with several good ideas who hears this guy come back to his cube and tell this story? Why would he let out a peep about his own patentable ideas in that office? If he holds on to them, he can negotiate better terms when he changes jobs. Which he may begin looking to do very shortly.

    --
    "He wrested the world's whereabouts from the heavens And locked the secret in a pocketwatch." - Dava Sobel
  6. You OWE them the patent! by stevew · · Score: 2, Informative

    I too have received the obligatory 1 dollar for a patent I helped develop. Consider that under law you did the work for them when you created the invention. Doesn't it make some sense that the invention is rightly owned by the corporation?

    Further, did you pay the 10K to 20K dollars to file the patent? Yeah - the patent itself doesn't cost that much (more like $2k I think) but the lawyers that wrote it did.

    So - what did you have on the line versus the company. You received your normal compensation and the company through in say another $10K on top of your compensation to receive the patent. Seems to me they have a moral right to it too!

    Now - if you did something on your own dime, and the company tried claiming that as well - this is another discussion all together. That doesn't seem to be the case in the initial query though. I happen to live in CA - with all it's OTHER faults (and there are so so many) CA does have a law on the books since around 1980 that if I develop the idea on my own time with my own resources, then NDA or not, I own it.

    That's my two cents worth.

    --
    Have you compiled your kernel today??
  7. Close, but no plaque by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Where I work, it's $1000 per co-inventor on filing and $1000 when it issues. If there are more than 4 co-inventors they split $4000.

    But no shiny plaque. ;-)

    AC
  8. My experience at Sun and HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I've been at both Sun and HP, and both have better plans than that. There have multi-stage payouts. First, you get paid for the "invention disclosure" to the company. Next, you get paid when the patent is filed, if the company approves it. Lastly, you get paid when the patent is granted, and the company will throw in the plaque.

    At Sun, I think it was $250/$500/$1000 when I was there, and at HP it's $175/$875/$1750. Nothing like the $1 foolishness you have.

    It's not about any particular patent, but the number of patents in the company portfolio. The company wants to encourage its employees to disclose patentable inventions (so it pays for disclosures). The nice thing is that the company will also pay for the patent lawyers but you will still get credit as the Inventor (IN), though the company will be the Assignee (AN).

    In any case, smart companies stand to make (or save) a whole lot of money by building their patent portfolio, so they reward their employees for helping to make that happen. Token amounts to the employer, but a nice chunk of change to the employee. $1 to fulfill some statutory obligation is ridiculous.