Slashdot Mirror


Should Inventions Be Automatically Owned By Your Employer?

An anonymous reader writes "Joshua Simmons authored an article for the N.Y.U. Journal of Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law. The article is a comparison of the developments in copyright law and patent law in the nineteenth century that resulted in copyright law developing a work made for hire doctrine while patent law only developed a patch work of judge-made employment doctrines. The article theorizes that patent law did not develop an inventions made for hire doctrine, because inventive activity was almost exclusively perceived to be performed by individuals. It goes on to suggest that, as patentable inventions today are generally perceived to be invented collaboratively, the Patent Act should be amended to borrow from the Copyright Act and adopt a principle similar to the work made for hire doctrine."

12 of 291 comments (clear)

  1. Depends .... by DaMattster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you've invented this on your own time, money, and resources there is no way in the shady side of hell that your employer should have any ownership of it. If you did this while being compensated by your employer, the situation is different. If you've used your employer's money and resources, then it is fair.

    1. Re:Depends .... by pwizard2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you're on the clock at work, then yes, it counts as a work/invention for hire. Even if you're salaried and don't really clock in, the invention/project should be 100% yours if it's something you invent/build out of your own house or garage.

      People have a life outside of work, after all.

      --
      "It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."
    2. Re:Depends .... by icebike · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you've invented this on your own time, money, and resources there is no way in the shady side of hell that your employer should have any ownership of it. If you did this while being compensated by your employer, the situation is different. If you've used your employer's money and resources, then it is fair.

      Well that depends...

      Most people can't compartmentalize their lives that completely. This is especially so when engaged in intellectual work (as opposed to factory drone work where you can simply flip a switch in your brain as you walk out the door).

      So if I hire you to develop a left handed corner scraper and in the process you create a patentable piece of work, you might claim (truthfully) that the idea came to you while sitting on the throne in your house on a sunday afternoon when you saw the reflection of the light switch in the mirror.

      Still, had you not been working for me explicitly on this project, you would, in all probability, never have had that spark of intuition.

      Its too easy for you to claim you had the idea after work hours. Every body mulls over work problems at home.

      Similarly, if you are employed to handle billing for your company and you stumble upon a totally unrelated idea, say for a new fishhook, on your day off or even on the job, its too easy for the company to claim it.

      Fishhooks have nothing to do with billing. Everybody mulls over recreational problems while at work.

      There needs to be a rational separation, such that your employer can only claim and idea when:
      1) the invention must have some relevance to your work duties
      2) you must be employed specifically to design/build/invent stuff
      3) you must have made some use of your employers facilities or time to develop, build, and test the invention
      4) you had access to some of your employer's proprietary information that helped you
      5) ??

      The night watchman at the Boeing plant plant that invents a new nose gear part after years of watching planes
      take off from his post in the guard station should still get to keep his design.
      The engineer or mechanic working on nose gear installation: Not so much.

      There is still a lot of grey areas, but at least rules like the above would eliminate a lot of patent grabbing. (From both sides).

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    3. Re:Depends .... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      People have a life outside of work, after all.

      What a quaint and archaic concept.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:Depends .... by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Its too easy for you to claim you had the idea after work hours."

      It's too easy to claim that an employer provided the "spark of intuition". It must have been bubbles in the watercooler, or something you heard in a meeting, or a thought you had while using the toilet at work!!

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
  2. irrelevant by shentino · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Employers have enough power to force employees to sign contracts as a condition of employment not unlike what you'd find in an EULA. No signature, no job.

    So it doesn't really matter in the long run what laws we pass unless we make it illegal for employers to ask for certain concessions.

    1. Re:irrelevant by DaMattster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Employers have enough power to force employees to sign contracts as a condition of employment not unlike what you'd find in an EULA. No signature, no job.

      So it doesn't really matter in the long run what laws we pass unless we make it illegal for employers to ask for certain concessions.

      Employers count on our fear of being unemployed to bully the prospective employee to sign away their rights.

    2. Re:irrelevant by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Some will. Some won't. Employers that will negotiate are like smart hot honest women. They exist. There are lots of them, and we all know some. There are not enough to go around for everyone. Heck, there are not enough jobs to go around even with people succumbing to bad employment contracts. You calling people who end up accepting crappy jobs is like calling guys idiots if they are not dating a PHD supermodel.

  3. Depends on how much of your life they buy by KC1P · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Your employer absolutely should be entitled to any IP you produce ... *if* they're paying you for 168/hours a week. If it's only 40 hours/week then there has to be room for you to do your thing on the time that belongs to you. I hate it (and refuse to sign -- cost me a great job once) when they try to just stick a catchall into your employee contract. Contracts are supposed to be quid pro quo deals, not quid pro nothing.

  4. Re:Of course by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Otherwise, how would Edison have invented so many things?

    That's easy, by being a patent clerk and being the worlds first patent troll.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  5. Re:A rate should be set at hire by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wrong, you are paid to do what you are paid to do. Inventions can only be owned by your employer if you are paid to sit on your arse all day long thinking and trying to invent things. If you are paid to code they own the code, not any inventions. If you are paid to calculate they own the product of the calculations not any inventions. Of course not to forget fuck all catch all clauses as they are clearly false in intent and there is no way they can claim when you invented anything, their paid for time or in your time. You or your mind is never, ever a slave to someone else's greed, regardless what psychopath corporate douche bags like Thomas Edison try to write in contracts so that they can publicly claim to invent things other people actually did.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  6. Re:A rate should be set at hire by BVis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Gee, Bank of America, I'm sorry I don't have a job and can't pay my mortgage, but you'll be happy to know that I turned down a gig on principle!"

    Yeah, see how far that gets you. Not to mention, if you're collecting unemployment benefits and you turn down a job, you disqualify yourself from any further benefits.

    Then there's the whole "US health insurance industry" problem, where getting cancer while not insured is fatal to either yourself or your entire economic identity. Most people don't have any choice but to get health insurance through their employer and, thanks to the for-profit health insurance industry, paying for your care out-of-pocket will cost you everything you own.

    Yeah, you'll be taking what we offer and you'll like it. If you don't like the language in the employment agreement, I'm sure we'll find someone that does.

    --
    Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.