Search results

Reasonable remuneration of employee inventions is a controversial issue causing court litigations among employees and employers in many countries. The paper aims to shed light on the missing economic interpretation of the reasonable remuneration of employee inventions. Specifically, it focuses on the concept of “reasonability” at the issue.

In an empirical qualitative multiple case-study setting, the paper explores inductively Czech corporate employee inventors' remuneration systems, using typological analysis and M. Weber's interpretative theoretical construct of “ideal type.”

At the first level, reasonability is a function of multi-amount rewarding, a certain level of total remuneration and identifiable benefits being a decisive factor. Additionally, the reasonability is conceptualised as a function of two dimensions – timing/risk and benefit–reward relation. At the second level, the reasonability is interpreted as a concept balancing seven points of view: timing, materiality, equity, risk management, transparency, system costs and exactness. At the third level, the paper offers an optimal remuneration system like the one that optimises developed seven-criterion framework.

Even if analysed within one-country and nine-company context, the insights are generalisable across a broader sample of countries with statutory rules for employee inventions. Studying more cases may enrich the findings. The findings are based merely on a rational perspective and do not deal with psychological aspects of employees.

The results may be helpful for intellectual property or R&D managers in building or reorganising employee invention remuneration systems within corporations. The developed seven-criteria model can serve as a discussion framework; the suggested optimal system as a reference point. The results may serve as well to consultants, judges or other parties involved in currently growing employee–employer controversies and litigations. The analysis may fuel public policy decisions, too.

The paper brings unique and detailed empirical insights into the issue of employee inventions. It offers a complex multi-perspective (employee/employer) framework through which the reasonability can be discussed and suggests an optimal system, which can serve as a reference point.

In a previous monograph a discussion took place on the implied terms at common law which were connected with the employer's duties. It is now proposed to consider the obligations of the employee which are implied by the common law. A discussion and an analysis is proposed of each of the following common law implied duties, namely a duty of care by the employee in carrying out his work; a duty of fidelity where an evaluation of its various aspects will take place and a duty of obedience. The employee's inventions and discoveries will then be treated.

In 1973 we published a booklet bearing the above title. This outlined points the inventor should observe in seeking patent protection using the legislation and procedures existing at that time.

Scholars of business, economics, and law have long recognized that rights to intellectual property (IP) intimately shape innovative activity and the pursuit of profits. More than 60 years ago, Michal Polanyi voiced the following concerns about awarding property rights to creations of the “intellect”:The law…aims at a purpose which cannot be rationally achieved. It tries to parcel up a stream of creative thought into a series of distinct claims, each of which is to constitute the basis of a separately owned monopoly. But the growth of human knowledge cannot be divided into such sharply circumscribed phases. Ideas usually develop gradually by shades of emphasis, and even when, from time to time, sparks of discovery flare up and suddenly reveal a new understanding, it usually appears that the new idea has been at least partly foreshadowed in previous speculations. (Polanyi, 1944, pp. 70–71)

A summary of key aspects of the final report of the eLib‐funded CATRIONA II project which investigated questions relating to the university management of locally‐created electronic resources from a UK‐wide perspective, but within the context of surveys and discussions carried out in Scottish universities. Quality electronic teaching and research resources, which are of significant value or potential value to academics, universities and the UK Higher Education community in general, are being ceated at high levels in all types of university. However, since they are not being created with the aim of wider access and use, few are networked, most are difficult to find or in difficult to access electronic formats, and consequently are unlikely to be suitable for reuse by other institutions or even other departments in the host institution. There can also be other problems such as a lack of clarity on the copyright position of resources on university Web sites and a failure to protect potentially valuable university resources from copyright infringement. University management of services offering access to these resources within and beyond the host institution would greatly improve the value that both the host institution and UK Higher Education as a whole obtain from this material and the effort that goes into creating it – particularly if local efforts were co‐ordinated nationally to ensure resource design standardisation and service interoperability. Universities appear to regard the issue as important and see the advantages of managing services as outweighing the disadvantages. Most institutions appear to envisage University Libraries playing a key role in the management of services.

This chapter provides an overview of five modes of intellectual property (IP) protection – patents, designs, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets – available in the United States, the European Union, and Japan. After describing the purposes of and principal differences among the five types of IP protection and outlining the advantages of each form, the chapter provides country- and region-specific information. The authors highlight the aspects of IP law in which international harmonization has, or has not yet, occurred, and offer insights into the relative advantages of various national and regional IP protection systems.

This chapter provides an overview of the five main modes of intellectual property (IP) protection – patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and designs – available in the United States, the European Union, and Japan. After describing the purposes of and principal differences among the five types of IP protection and outlining the advantages of each form, the chapter provides country- and region-specific information. The authors highlight the aspects of IP law in which international harmonization has, or has not yet, occurred, and offer insights into the relative advantages of various national and regional IP protection systems.

To keep this paper within measurable compass, I propose not to discuss the history of British Patent Law except to point out that the 1624 Statute of King James, which covered the original law of patents in a single clause, has been replaced in the 1949 Act by 103 clauses followed by three formidable schedules, this being the 32nd Patents Act to be placed upon the Statute Book.

I begin with a dispute over a fox hunt, by which to understand the law of tangible property, then develop that metaphor for the major types of intellectual property. I start with domestic U.S. patent law for the sake of concreteness, and generalize to other jurisdictions and types of intellectual property. In the latter parts of the paper I discuss the international implications of intellectual property, including especially the effects of information spillovers. The last part of the paper describes the hazards in analogizing “trade” in intellectual property rights to trade in goods, and particularly in interpreting international patent data. These hazards motivate the search for a structural model specially adapted to the purpose of valuing international intellectual property rights and rules. The goal is to give economists a simple and integrated framework for analyzing intellectual property across time, jurisdiction and regime type, with an eye towards eventually developing other incentive systems that have the advantages of property (such as decentralized decision-making), but fewer of the disadvantages.

To present a measurement framework to capture the importance of the use of knowledge within the new product development (NPD) process.

A literature review enabled 200 product development measures to be compiled. These were categorised into six dimensions: stakeholder contribution, operating context, reuse, invention, exploitation, and NPD performance. Four companies applied selected measures and assessed the cube for its ability to improve measurement and management of their NPD process. This process refined the approach. A web‐based questionnaire (with 130 responses) assessed how a wider population perceived their performance and capability to measure performance in each of the six dimensions.

Respondents consider themselves capable of delivering good products and services, but are less confident in their ability to manage and measure knowledge reuse, invention and exploitation activities.

Full implementation of the measurement cube was not possible. Further research should assess the comprehensiveness, applicability and usefulness of the approach in more detail.

Introduction of the measurement cube and measures in the six dimensions identified would enable companies to go beyond traditional financial measures for their NPD processes and move towards a more performance‐oriented culture.

This paper synthesises the results from many other isolated studies on NPD metrics. In addition, it focuses on the measurement of the NPD process from a knowledge perspective, providing an integrating framework (the measurement cube), which is unique.