South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1914-07-02


lOng2 Here two principles must be
reconciled. One is the fact. already
mentioned. that the employee usually
is not paid for anything beyond the
usual mechanical skill involved in his
work. Therefore he should not be re-
quired 10 give the entire rights OF his
invention as a bonus TO his employer.
were TO entirely control any inventions
made in connection with his regular
work, ne might easily dictate unrea-
sonable terms TO his employer and the
latter would be barred from proper
progress in his line. Consequently
the law takes a middle course in hold
ing that when an invention Is made
by a workman in course of his regular
employment the employer has a
shop right to manufacture and use
the invention-but no rights beyond
the same. If the employer wants 70
control the entire rights to the inven-
ton he must make some deal with
the inventor for doing So Otherwise
the latter can license others to manu-
facture under his patent. or can
manufacture under il himself This
shop right" or implied license to
which the employer is entitled with
out paying is not transferable. The
employer cannot sell it and if he goes
out of business (as when an employ
ing company sells out to some other
-concern) this right ceases and leaves
the inventor in exclusive control of
the patent, unless the latter agreed TO
a transfer of the shop right"
II the employee makes an invention
outside Of his working hours and re-
duces the same TO practice (either by
making clear sketches. building a
model or applying for a patent) with
out utilizing any time, material or
equipment belonging TO his employer,
the invention belongs entirely 20 the
employee, unless his contract of en-
ployment says otherwise. However,
if he builds his model or sample in
his employers shop, using the en-
plOyers material or tools in develop
ing or peTfecting the invention. or if
he works the conception into a tang
ible form during the hours for which
he is paid-then the employer has q
shop right even though the inven-
ton was conceived outside of the reg
ular working hours. Where an en-
plOyer takes advantage Of the work
mans ignorance and applies for a
patent himself on an invention con-
ceived by his employee. he runs risk
OF having his patent declared invalid
if the matter is ever aired. for even
if the employee has contracted to as
sign his invention 10 the employer
the patents must be in the name or
the actual inventor.
NOTICE.
However. if the basic idea Of the in
vention was conceived by the en-
ployer and suggested 10 the workman
the invention belongs entirely to the
former, even if the employee develops
and improves it, and the patent
should DO taken out in the name Of
the employer. The commonly pre-
vailing idea that the one who suggest
ed the invention and the one who
constructed it are joint, patent can
only issue properly when two parties
worked together and conceived the
idea at practically one and the same
instant. or where the invention com
pTises features contributed by both
and which cannot be separated with
ont snnulling the invention No
changes or rearrangements which the
en- ployee may suggest viii give him
right to the invention If the latter was
conceived in its ESSENTIAL elements by
the employer. provided these changes
are not so radically novel as to in
'Nlve a new and distinct invention,
which would belong 10 the workman
subject TO the shop right of his en-
ployer. IF the changes thus made by
the workman in a device on which he
=
ton are details Of Improvement ("an-
cillary' or contributing to the design
preconceived by the employer these
details or auxiliary Improvements be
long to the one who conceived the
general principle and may be includ-
ed by him in his patent. 1t is be
cause of this ruling that some of our
prominent electrical inventors have
been such prolific patentees. being
a ~ 70 M IN hnf ff.r
the wealth Of detail Improvements
developed by others working under
them on general ideas suggested by
them.
SHOP RIGHTS.
The same principle that an employ
er is entitled only to 'shOD right aD-
plies even to inventions made by a
foreman hired to perfect and improve
an employers products or methods,
unless there was . distinct agreement
to the contrary. Where contracts are
intended to give the employer the ex-
elusive rights to inventions made by
the employee these must not be
wOrded TOO broadly. otherwise they
may be annuulled as being unreason-
able and against public policy. To be
valid they should be lin tied both as
to time and as TO the range of inVen-
tons covered. Thus. ii is not fair
that a mans compensation while with
a given employer should entitle the
latter forever afterwards to inventions
which the man may make in that line.
but it may be equitable 10 include
such inventions when made during
that term of employment or within a
few years after ending the same. So,
also an employer should not claim a
mortgage on a mans entire ingenuity
unless paying for the same That is,
If a man is employed in making cleo
tricaI apparatus. and can profit by
the suggestions received from his en-
ployer and others while at work. his
compensation may properly be held TO
include the right to all electrical in
ventions made by him while working
for his employer, provided he had
siored q contract 10 this effect But