• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Contact form
Patentanwaltskanzlei

Patentanwaltskanzlei

  • Deutsch

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email
MENUMENU
  • Services
    • Advice On Protective IP Rights
    • Patent Application /TM Registration
    • Enforcement Of IP Rights
    • Defence Against IP Rights Enforcement
    • Costs
  • Company
    • Fields of Law
      • Patent Law
      • Utility Model Law
      • Employees‘ Inventions
      • Trademark Law
      • Design Law
      • Trademark and Product Piracy
      • Expert Opinions
    • Our Law Firm
      • Dr. Tim Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Klaus Zimmermann
      • Zhichao Ying
      • Walter Benjamin Feldheim
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

German employee inventions in an international group

17. November 2020

For employee inventions in a German company that is integrated into an international group structure, the German Employee Invention Act applies in principle. This situation creates uncertainty: How are employee inventions remunerated in the group?

Diensterfindung im KonzernIn the general globalisation many companies act as a group. With regard to the German Employee Inventions Act (Arbeitnehmererfindungsgesetz, ArbEG), this creates uncertainty: where is the invention considered to be claimed if the invention has to be reported to the U.S. parent company upon instruction? How is the use of employee inventions calculated in the group with regard to remuneration? And is an invention in the patent pool to be remunerated at all?

Information on Employee inventions in the group

With regard to the employer’s obligation to provide information on the use of the employee inventions, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) already gave a legal classification in 2002 (decision “Abgestuftes Getriebe”, X ZR 127/99): Accordingly, the employer only owes information about the use of the patent at group companies to the extent that these acts are relevant for the assessment of the remuneration. In addition, the BGH ruled in the decision that the obligation to provide information must be reasonable for the employer.

Remuneration according to licence agreements

In practice, the remuneration of employee inventions within a group should be calculated on the basis of the licence agreements relating to the invention. Therefore, if affiliated group companies have been granted a license to use employee inventions with a revenue-based compensation, this figure is sufficient for the assessment of the inventive value. This is because the turnover of the group companies would then be reflected in the employer’s own (licence) turnover.

Depending on the circumstances of the case, the employer may have to provide the employee-inventor with a breakdown of the individual composition of the license income, the BGH added in its 2002 decision.

What remuneration if no sublicensing fees are paid?

In practice, however, it is often the case that the employer does not receive any sublicensing fees for allowing other companies belonging to the group to use employee inventions. In extreme cases, the invention is even placed in a patent pool of the group – with the result that it can be used by all companies belonging to the group free of royalties.

Nevertheless, the own employer still has an economic advantage from the employee invention, because he in turn can also use the other inventions in the patent pool or in the group without having to pay fees or remuneration. However, this does not benefit the employee inventor.

The BGH therefore developed binding solution approaches for such a case, because even in this case constellation a employee inventor is entitled to an appropriate compensation. In its decision of 2002, the BGH suggested linking to an assessment made when the invention was contributed to the patent pool or linking to the value of participation in the patent pool itself.

In addition, it would also be possible to link to the turnover of the company or companies that the licensee allows to use the invention – if the employer belonging to the group is to be seen as a unit with the group. This would be the case where the employer is a subsidiary set up solely for research and development purposes or where the individual group companies are managed as dependent departments of a single company.

Further rules for employee inventions in the Group

Instruction to report an invention to U.S. parent company

Initially, we had mentioned the question of where an invention is considered to be claimed if the invention is to be reported to the U.S. parent company on instruction?
There is a clear decision of the arbitration board: legally, the U.S. Patent Division is to be seen as the receiving agent in such a case. Therefore, this invention is – upon expiration of the deadline – considered to be claimed by the German subsidiary due to the so-called fiction of the claim. Please read our article on this case constellation: employee inventions in German subsidiary of the U.S. parent company.

Scaling down to turnover in group structures

Anyone who, as an inventor in a group structure, hopes to receive remuneration directly according to the licence fees or according to turnover is mistaken. Group external sales are generally taken into account on the basis of so-called “reasonable license agreement parties”. In this context, the turnover of the using group company becomes the relevant basis of calculation, especially in the case of economic unity and division of labour within the group.

In addition, in the case of group structures, turnover is generally graduated. This is because it is assumed for groups that there is a shift in causality away from employee inventions towards other important factors such as distribution network, market leadership, quality and brand.

Licensing of an LOT network

Finally, please notice that there’s no remuneration claim from licensing of an LOT network, but there’s an obligation for the employer to inform the employee inventor that he/she is a member of the LOT network.

Do you need counsel in questions of Employee Invention?

Our attorneys possess extensive expertise in the field of employees’ inventions, enabling us to provide counsel to both, the company and the employee, regarding all questions in relation to the Law on Employees’ Inventions.


 

Sources: 

BGH “Abstuftes Getriebe” from 2002, X ZR 127/99

Image:

geralt | pixabay.com | CCO License

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 

Category iconLicenses,  Patent Law Tag iconBGH,  graduated,  graduated gear,  group companies,  group company,  invention to be reported to parent company,  parent company,  patent pool,  pharmaceutical company,  remuneration,  remuneration of the invention in the patent pool,  service invention,  service invention in the group,  service invention in the patent pool,  subsidiary,  turnover in the group

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: Licenses

All articles

Blog Menu

  • Design Law
  • Healthcare & Lifesciences
  • International Intellectual Property
  • Licenses
  • News from our law firm
  • Overall
  • Patent Law
  • Product- and Trademark piracy
  • Trademark Law

Recent Posts

  • What is the public allowed to know? 3. June 2024
  • BPatG: Patent claim of cancer drug on active substance as salt 7. March 2022
  • Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022 4. March 2022
  • CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks? 25. February 2022

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Das könnte Sie auch interessieren:

4. March 2022
Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

22. February 2022
PAP is in force: UPC possible in 2022

PAP is in force: UPC possible in 2022

8. February 2022
Germany: Value in dispute and costs in proceedings

Germany: Value in dispute and costs in proceedings

3. February 2022
PCT application – does the principle of joint applicants apply?

PCT application – does the principle of joint applicants apply?

1. February 2022
Proof of patent infringement by whistleblower

Proof of patent infringement by whistleblower

19. January 2022
Computer Data identification declared invalid

Computer Data identification declared invalid

Contact us or request a call back

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Request a call back

Footer

Contact

Hanauer Landstrasse 287
D – 60314 Frankfurt am Main
Deutschland
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Office Hours
Moday – Friday:   08:00-18:00

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Law Firm

  • Request non-binding call back
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

Newsletter INT

© MD LEGAL Patentanwalt, European Patent Attorney PartG

Contact Form

 

Give us a call, send us an email or fill out the contact form.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Rückruf INT

Please note: If we deal specifically with your individual case, this is what is known as an initial consultation. In accordance with Section 34 of the Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz, this incurs one-off costs of 190 euros plus MwSt. We will be happy to assist you in a personal consultation after our telephone call.

Kontaktformular

 

Rufen Sie uns an, schicken Sie uns eine Mail oder füllen Sie das Kontaktformular aus.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Rückruf

Um dieses Angebot nutzen zu können, müssen Sie der Speicherung Ihrer personenbezogenen Daten zustimmen. Wir behandeln diese streng vertraulich und verwenden sie nur zur Kontaktaufnahme mit Ihnen. Mehr dazu lesen Sie in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.

Bitte beachten Sie: Wenn wir uns konkret mit Ihrem Einzelfall befassen, ist dies eine sogenannte Erstberatung. Für eine solche entstehen gemäß § 34 Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz einmalige Kosten in Höhe von 190 Euro plus MwSt. Gerne helfen wir Ihnen im Anschluss an unser Telefonat in einem persönlichen Beratungsgespräch weiter.