22. I can appreciate your desire to learn more about patents. However, if an employee has signed a patent over to the employer which is the usual pattern, and then leaves the employer for employment elsewhere, he will not know what has become of the patent. 23. W, X, and Y During the 9 yrs with my last employer, I was the inventor of a whole series of U.S. and foreign patents. The patents protected processes & process improvements on a class of chemicals. As a result of the successful processes, etc., cne of the products covered by patent has become the employer's largest selling single product. The product on O-T-C USY drug has brought employment to about 150-200 individuals, turned around a money losing plant which has been a financial strain on the Co. for 6 years when the original plant had been built for an abortive, MM-existant product. The plant had been padlocked without having produced a gram of the fraudulent "consultant's product." During the years required for me (+ other lab colleagues) to subject new processes, new products, and one USY OTC drug, my health failed. Only a last minute, 10 hrs. duration open-heart surgery procedure saved my life, but left me more-or-less disabled, and declining rapid1y. During my recuperation (at home) from the surgery, my employer required that I answer detailed questions on the new processes, the plant for which was then under construction. After my illness had kept me away from work for 6 months. A company sponsored, (but employee contribution based) long-term disability insurance plan began to pay me monthly disability benefits (a supplement to social security). After I had been away from work for 9 months, and had been receiving disability insurance checks for about 4 months, I foolishly decided to return to work. I mainly believed that if I then felt too weak to continue to work, then I could return to disabled status & receive disability payments. In reality, my employer took the opportunity for my departure from disability pensioneer status to seperate me from the Co. and freeing him of the insurance plan from my support in the event that my health failed for a second time. Within 9 months of my return to work (bearing a synthetic plastic & steel aortic heart valve) my employer discharged me. After all, the new process which I had patented no longer needed my supervision, the new plant had come on stream, there were few problems requiring my attention. I was not given the opportunity to reapply for disability benefits. My employer made sure that I had not been invited to re-apply for disability benefits. In fact, he changed the benefits plan and the insurance carrier after I had returned to work. 24. I don't think patents are a proper measure of productivity!! One of my developments failed to result in a patent although novel, because the legal department made an error that prevented obtaining a patent due to the statute of limitations. However, the results produced over $20,000,000 sales at about 7% net after taxes, and the technology was later sold in Europe for $1,000,000. I'm not bitter. I'm very happy with my employer and am now in my 28th year with the same company. 25. Bench chemists are probably one of the most exploited groups in the business arena. Patents are only one example. It is my opinion that, unfortunately, the only answer to this is a union. I don't mean a namby-pamby "association", I mean a union, e.g., the teamsters etc. It is truly sad that there is no good will among men. The best thing I could have from my employer is my 1968 purchasing power. It might be instructive to publish (C&EN) a comparison of chemist salaries vs. purchasing power ('68 dollars) to reflect what is really happening in compensation. Also compare machinists etc. or other skilled union workers. 26. Patents I have been managing support groups, particularly in analytical chemistry, since 1974. Both the people I have been managing and I have been instrumental in a number of product development scientists securing patents, yet we do not receive any credit. This system is typical throughout the chemical industry and the ACS should investigate this matter. 27. The several inventions by me for my employer have not been patented but have been 1) given away to help sell our commodity fibers or 2) kept secret in proprietary formulations. - The American Chemical Society is a pitiful bureaucracy. It sits like a beached clam or jellyfish, unable to help itself or any other "creatives" except to be devoured to feed the other "creatures". The ACS cannot help the chemists who are terminated the ACS is just a reporter. The ACS cannot help the employers in a meaningful way -- it is a laughingstock compared to SOCMA, MCA, etc. The ACS is an incredibly inefficient behemoth compared to the National Rifle Association, Airline Pilots Association, Bass Anglers Sportsmen's Society, American Medical Association, etc. The ACS initials should be WABOA! What A Bunch Of Amateurs 28. Work being considered for patent. - 29. A patent issued in 1975 to me is the most used patent I have been issued. Aproximately 150 plants are now using the process which was patented and is limited to this number because no additional raw material is now available in the U.S. Additional plants in foreign countries are also using the process. 30. Chemical inventors should be paid royalties even though employed privately. 6 projects which I worked on exclusively were filed for patents under my managers and supervisors names and I was not included. I was told that the company did not permit more than two names on the applications. The company I now work for does not require a written agreement for assigning patents, but I am told that anything resulting from my work related projects belongs to them even if I applied for a patent independent of the company. 31. Your questionaire on patents is a very significant exploration into a sordid area. Similar questionaires should be made in the areas of (a) discrimination (b) favoratism and (c) competence of management. Thank you for your interest and attempts at understanding. Copyright 1982 Neal Orkin Published in the May 1982 issue of The EUROPEAN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REVIEW. Fn's Most technically oriented American employees must contractually assign See generally, Phillips, Employees Inventions: a Comparative Study, 2bid., pp. 153-155. This occurs when an employee was specifically hired to invent or his assigned duty was to devote his or her efforts to a particular problem in the course of employment. 4This occurs when the employee was not hired to invent, or where an invention was conceived independently of one's job or deals with subject matter unrelated to employment.wnership subject to a shop right in favor of the. employer a non-exclusive, non-assignable, royalty-free license to use the invention for the duration of the patent grant).5 Roberts Sears, Roebuck and Co. is one such recent case decided by using elements of the common law. It's main points of interest are derived from the excessive duration of the litigation and the huge sums of money at stake. As the case - pr series of cases-involves highly complex legal issues not related to patent law, the author will attempt to resolve these issues for his European colleagues as painless a manner as possible. This results when the employee has a non-job related invention, but has utilized the employer's time and/or facilities. 6The case citations will ne noted thronologically as the article progresses. |