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

Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei

  • 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. Karl-Hermann Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Tim Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Klaus Zimmermann
      • Zhichao Ying
      • Clara Elinor Grünewald
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

Employee’s invention in a German subsidiary of an US parent group

24. May 2019

An employee’s invention made in a German subsidiary of a US company must be reported to the US parent company if such an instruction exists. Nevertheless, the German subsidiary tacitly claims the invention – through the fiction of claiming it.

employee's invention in German subsidiaryAn invention which arises during working hours in a company belongs to the employer and must be made known to the employer immediately and separately in text form in accordance with German law for employee’s inventions (in German: Arbeitnehmererfindungsgesetz (ArbEG)). However, German companies are increasingly integrated into international corporations.
This has a serious impact on claiming an employee’s invention. To whom should the employee’s invention be reported now? And who’s claiming it?

Parent group has the right to direct

In the present case, the employee inventor worked from 2014 to 2015 in a German subsidiary (hereinafter referred to as “A GmbH”) which at that time belonged to a US parent company (hereinafter referred to as “A Inc.”).

From 2014 and thus at the time of the invention disclosure, the employees of “A GmbH” were obliged to report any invention disclosures directly to the US Patent Department of “A Inc. The employee inventor made five employee’s inventions in 2014, followed the instructions and reported his inventions to the American parent company. Thus he acted completely correctly in the sense of the right to direct (§ 106 S.2 GewO).

In legal terms, the US patent department of “A Inc.” was the receiving agent as a result of this instruction within the meaning of § 5.1 ArbEG . Consequently, the invention disclosures filed with the US patent department of “A Inc.” had a direct effect against “A GmbH”. Therefore, the invention disclosures were not only sent to the US patent department, but also to the German subsidiary “A GmbH” (pursuant to § 6.2 ArbEG).

It was therefore disputed between the employee inventor and the legal successor of the German company “A GmbH” whether “A GmbH” had claiming the inventions. The arbitration board of the DPMA was called upon to clarify this issue.

Decisions of Arbitration Board of DPMA are binding

With its decision, the Arbitration Board upheld the employee inventor who had asserted that “A GmbH” had claiming his invention. As the German “A GmbH” also received the invention disclosures, the German subsidiary had already at that time been obliged to register the service inventions for the grant of an industrial property right with effect for Germany pursuant to § 13.1  ArbEG – although the instruction to report to the US parent group was correct.

The Arbitration Board of the DPMA clarified that, as a result of the fiction under § 6.2 ArbEG, the “A GmbH” had claiming and made use of the employee’s inventions.

Excursus into the German Fiction of Claiming

The fiction of the claim is an implied claim, which is made without the active involvement of the employer. The so-called Fiction of Claiming (in German: Inanspruchnahmefiktion) applies to all inventions made after 1 October 2009. This fictional scheme as from 1 October 2009 reverses the previous scheme. Because before 1 October 2009, employee’s inventions became available if the employer did not declare the claim in writing within four months. Now things are exactly the other way around: the claim can be assumed to have been made if the employer does not declare the release within four months. The employer then tacitly claimed the invention.

This was fact in this case. As a result, “A GmbH” – like its legal successor – was obliged to pay compensation for the service inventions (§ 9.1 ArbEG).

Obligations are arising from § 14 ArbEG by assuming fiction of  claiming

In addition, the obligations under § 14 ArbEG became effective for the “A GmbH”; this is also important to note for all internationally involved German companies.

§ 14 ArbEG Application for intellectual property rights abroad

After claiming the employee’s invention, the employer is entitled to register it abroad for the granting of industrial property rights.
For foreign states in which the employer does not wish to acquire protective rights, he must release the employee’s invention and, upon request, enable him to acquire protective rights abroad.

The release should be made in sufficient time so that the employee can take advantage of the priority periods of the interstate treaties in the field of industrial property protection.

The employer may, at the same time as the release pursuant to paragraph 2, reserve for himself a non-exclusive right to use the employee’s invention in the foreign states concerned against appropriate remuneration and demand that the employee, when exploiting the released invention in the foreign states concerned, take into account the employer’s obligations arising from the employee’s invention contracts existing at the time of the release against appropriate remuneration.

 

Have you made an employee’s invention? Or are you, as an employer, concerned about the resulting remuneration claims?

The patent law firm Dr. Meyer-Dulheuer & Partners LLP possesses extensive expertise in the field of employees’ inventions, enabling us to provide counsel to both, the company and the employee.

Sources:

Decision of Arbitrataion Board of DPMA Arb.Erf. 49/16 (in German)

Image:

TheDigialArtist /pixabay.com / CCO License  

  • share  19 
  • share 
  • share 
  • tweet  
  • share 

Category iconPatent Law Tag iconPatent,  Germany,  DPMA,  Employees’ Inventions,  Invention,  decision of DPMA,  service invention,  German ArbEG,  Arbitration Board,  employee's invention,  German subsidiary,  parent group,  remuneration claims,  Fiction of Claiming,  fiction,  subsidiary

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: Patent Law

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
This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form

Recent Posts

  • Thermomix infringement by Lidl: Will Monsieur Cuisine still exist? 25. January 2021
  • Time limit missed for remedying deficiencies at EUIPO 25. January 2021
  • Bacardi wins in trademark dispute Vodka 42 BELOW 20. January 2021
  • HALLOUMI vs. BBQLOUMI: Cyprus loses again in trademark dispute 20. January 2021

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:

25. January 2021
Thermomix infringement by Lidl: Will Monsieur Cuisine still exist?

Thermomix infringement by Lidl: Will Monsieur Cuisine still exist?

18. January 2021
Where in Europe is a patent application worthwhile?

Where in Europe is a patent application worthwhile?

15. January 2021
BGH ‘Cigarette package’: Extension of undisclosed features in EU patent

BGH ‘Cigarette package’: Extension of undisclosed features in EU patent

11. January 2021
Patent for coding of audio signals confirmed by German BPatG

Patent for coding of audio signals confirmed by German BPatG

8. January 2021
GAIA-X: German funding program for European Cloud

GAIA-X: German funding program for European Cloud

5. January 2021
Employee invention of managing directors or board members?

Employee invention of managing directors or board members?

Footer

Contact

Franklinstr. 61-63
D-60486 Frankfurt am Main
Germany

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Customer Reviews

Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG mbB Patentrecht, Markenrecht, Eigentum hat 4,78 von 5 Sternen 23 Bewertungen auf ProvenExpert.com

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
  • Info secure emails
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form

© Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG mbB

Kontaktformular

 

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

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

This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form

Contact Form

 

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

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

This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form