Author Box
Articles Categories
All Categories
Articles Resources

When Does an Employer's Intellectual Property Policy Go Too Far?

May 31, 2012 | Comments: 0 | Views: 267

Many companies require their employees to agree to written policies that clarify Intellectual Property ownership of employment-related work product.

The typical form of such a written policy provides that all Intellectual Property such as patentable inventions, copyrightable works of authorship or trade secrets, that are created by an employee in the course of his or her employment, are fully assigned to -- and therefore owned exclusively -- by the employer.

Additionally, other companies, particularly those engaged in software development or the creation of media content, have recently gone even further.

Some businesses have demanded that their employees agree to policies that assign and transfer complete right, title and interest to all Intellectual Property created during the entire time of employment - regardless of whether such inventions were created within the scope or course of employment.

One potential rationale for the recent proliferation of such policies is the growing difficulty in drawing clear technological lines between "on-duty" and "off-duty" creative activities. With the ubiquity of smart phones, laptops, netbooks, jump drives and other portable devices, it has become more difficult to draw clear lines between when and where a particular item of Intellectual Property was actually reduced to practice (in the case of patents) or first fixed in tangible form (in the case of copyrights).

This is particularly true with digital content, which is no longer generated solely within the confines of a physical office setting, but can be captured and edited anywhere, at any time.

Consequently, employers may consider taking the broadest possible approach, and demand a universal acquisition of all employee-created Intellectual Property regardless of the employee's location, time, manner, or purpose when creating it.

However, employees often fear that this arrangement makes it dangerously tempting for the company to claim rights in their employees' personal creative projects without offering any additional compensation, other than the benefit of continued employment.

They may fear that employers may show up to assert these rights only after the personal project has demonstrated economic value, and effectively use the policy as a justification to legally acquire that for which they never actually bargained in the first place.

As a policy matter, some commentators have argued that permitting enforcement of such overbroad employer-employee Intellectual Property ownership policies will have deleterious effects on society, as employees' incentives to create independent content, and to contribute to Open Source Code and Creative Commons will be stifled.

Recognizing these valid policy concerns, and the potential for employer abuse, in at least 8 states, demanding acquiescence from employees through an overbroad policy of claimed Intellectual Property ownership as a required condition of continued employment has been declared unconscionable, void as against public policy, and/or lacking adequate contractual consideration, absent additional compensation other than continued employment.

For example, California specifically exempts all inventions and Intellectual Property created outside of the workplace and without use of company facilities. In addition to the protections of the California Labor Code, California statutes provide other types of protections to creators of copyrightable works when they, as "independent contractors," enter into work-for-hire agreements with those who commission their works.

This scenario is quite common in the entertainment field, where business entities often attempt to reduce overhead expenses by hiring writers as independent contractors rather than employees.

California provides strong disincentives for employers to implement such a policy. California law provides that one who commissions a "work made for hire," as defined in Section 101 of the Copyright Act, is considered the employer of the creator of the work for purposes of workers' compensation and unemployment insurance.

Consequently in California, whenever a creator works on a work made for hire basis as defined by federal copyright law, that creator automatically becomes an "employee," obligating the employer to bear the cost of workers' compensation and unemployment insurance.

Further, unless one obtains workers' compensation insurance before entering into such a work made for hire agreement with the creator, before any work is performed, and before any payments are made, there is potential criminal as well as civil liability for failure to maintain such insurance. California issues penalties of up to $100,000 against uninsured employees. In addition, the creator may be entitled to make unemployment benefit claims despite the fact that both the hiring entity and the creator envisioned that the creator would be an independent contractor.

From the employer's standpoint, acquisition of employees' personal Intellectual Property could also open the proverbial can of worms. By having such a policy in place, employees' participation on social networking sites, uploading of video clips, blog submissions and even family photographs could technically become the Intellectual Property of the employer. Even offensive materials could become part and parcel of the employers' theoretical roster of corporate property.

Most employers would presumably want to distance themselves from this unsupervised private behavior by arguing that these are personal activities that constitute "frolics and detours," and are not employer-authorized activities from an agency perspective. However, attempting to maintain such distance from employees' personal activities is arguably at odds, at least in principle, with simultaneously claiming legal title and ownership over the same materials.

In conclusion, companies would do well to assert Intellectual Property ownership rights to copyrightable works, inventions, trade secrets and other materials created by employees within the scope of employment. However, a blanket policy which lays claim to any and all employee-created Intellectual Property-whether related to employment or not, is both unwise and potentially unenforceable.

Joseph C. Gioconda, Esq. is an experienced Intellectual Property attorney and consultant, and the founder of the GIOCONDA LAW GROUP PLLC ( ), a New York City-based brand protection and anti-counterfeiting law firm. He is also the CEO of RogueFinder LLC ( ) which finds and targets "rogue websites."

Source: EzineArticles
Was this Helpful ?

Rate this Article

Article Tags:

Intellectual Property


Intellectual Property Ownership







Thus, you can apply for the negligence compensation under such circumstances in order to recover your loss, Negligence Claims, Negligence compensation Involvedness of Negligence Claims. The court

By: Simon Liva l Legal > Personal Injury l December 13, 2012 lViews: 291

If a lawyer is not able to devote enough time to your case then your defense is likely to suffer. Moreover specialization in one stream or other of defense is important so that the attorney can

By: Simon Liva l Legal > Criminal Law l December 12, 2012 lViews: 429

Filing a business bankruptcy can be a complex and critical task, but you have several options. You can consult your bankruptcy attorney to know which among those options is right for you.This is a

By: Harvard McIntosh l Legal > Corporations LLC l December 11, 2012 lViews: 235

You can always check for the treatments that are covered. This is because there are some policies which do not give you claims if you meet any kind of head injury.You can always check for the

By: Simon Liva l Legal > Personal Injury l November 05, 2012 lViews: 240

In Colorado, you have many Personal Injury Lawyers to choose from. When you choose the Law Offices of Andrew C. Bubb you instantly put years of experience and legal know how in your corner. Attorney

By: Dilshad l Legal > Personal Injury l October 25, 2012 lViews: 389

If you have been charged with a crime, speak with Boulder criminal defense attorney Steven Louth immediately to protect your rights. Steven Louth is a criminal defense attorney and criminal trial

By: Dilshad l Legal > Personal Injury l October 18, 2012 lViews: 243

Since the abolition of the UK's default retirement age in 2011, there has been some ambiguity about when retirement should take place, and whether employers could enforce it. Now, after a landmark

By: Nick Jervisl Legal > Employment Lawl June 15, 2012 lViews: 203

Women, men, or children can become victims of a sexual crime. When this happens, the victim usually blames him or herself and may not even report it. If you have or are ever a victim of a sexual

By: Peter David Wendtl Legal > Employment Lawl June 15, 2012 lViews: 213

A state employee of the Office of Vocation Rehabilitation ("State Office") turned to us in connection with their discovery of several practices of their employer that appeared to be improper if not

By: Jonathan Cerritol Legal > Employment Lawl June 05, 2012 lViews: 220

Thousands of hardworking individuals are faced with workplace accidents every year. Sometimes, it is due to their carelessness and sometimes, it is due to unsafe working conditions.

By: Jasmin Zl Legal > Employment Lawl June 04, 2012 lViews: 187

What will you do if you are wrongfully accused while at work? The thought alone of being accused of a crime is scary.

By: Latisha A Lebronl Legal > Employment Lawl June 02, 2012 lViews: 208

If you believe that your employer has treated you unfairly, has unfairly dismissed you or has discriminated against you in some way, you may be in the process of hiring an employment law lawyer to

By: Manik Pahwal Legal > Employment Lawl May 30, 2012 lViews: 184

An important part of an private investigation can be preliminarily accomplished with nothing more than a telephone, reliable laptop and an Internet connection. Conducting thorough and successful

By: Joseph C Gioconda, Esql Computers & Technology > Computer Forensicsl June 14, 2012 lViews: 252

When an individual (known as a Registrant) creates and registers a new Internet domain name, he leaves clues, pieces of a large complex data puzzle, behind. Understanding and interpreting these clues

By: Joseph C Gioconda, Esql Computers & Technology > Computer Forensicsl June 11, 2012 lViews: 147

Those involved in the struggle against online piracy have raised a host of questions about the phenomenon of websites selling counterfeit products. Who is really behind it? Why are "rogue websites"

By: Joseph C Gioconda, Esql Computers & Technology > Computer Forensicsl May 31, 2012 lViews: 197

Anonymity on the Internet is a major impetus behind online chaos and counterfeiting. Requiring registrants of domain names to disclose verifiable identifying information would go a long way toward

By: Joseph C Gioconda, Esql Legal > Cyber Lawl May 31, 2012 lViews: 222

Discuss this Article

comments powered by Disqus