Whose Invention Is It Anyway? Employee Invention-Assignment Agreements and Their Limits

From AcaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Citation: Parker Howell (2012) Whose Invention Is It Anyway? Employee Invention-Assignment Agreements and Their Limits. Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts (RSS)
Internet Archive Scholar (search for fulltext): Whose Invention Is It Anyway? Employee Invention-Assignment Agreements and Their Limits
Download: https://digital.law.washington.edu/dspace-law/handle/1773.1/1169
Tagged:

Summary

Describes common law defaults for invention assignment to employers, 7 states with "freedom to create" laws that limit assignable inventions (excluding those created entirely on own time, without company resources, and not relating to company business) written in the 1970s-80s. Cases have slowly arisen from those laws, and courts have interpreted their limits narrowly (eg, taking "entirely" literally). Uses Mattel v MGM (Bratz) as case study: employee won eventually due to ambiguity in employment contract, not state law limitations. Though they'll only matter in closest of cases, factors in state "freedom to create" law "provide a useful framework to aid courts in making well-reasoned decisions about ownership of inventions within the limits of public policy."

Theoretical and Practical Relevance

Provides "practice pointers" for attorneys representing employers and employees.

Retrieved from "https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Whose_Invention_Is_It_Anyway%3F_Employee_Invention-Assignment_Agreements_and_Their_Limits&oldid=11093"