Case study on intellectual property right - Essay Example

In a context of intellectual property rights, perhaps most common are copyrights and patents. Both are designed to protect those who had invested their talents in producing their works and allow for a reasonable financial return for their efforts within a certain time frame, after which the right or patent will expire and become a common good subject to the commerce of man. The advent of new technologies has made it imperative for all the producers of values embedded in intellectual capital and knowledge-based assets to assert their rights and protect these assets.

The convergence of electronics consumer products, the rise of Internet usage and the digitization of most communications technology has made it quite easy to copy anything. A precedent case was filed by the music group Metallica against the founder and those who had availed of the file-sharing services of Napster software as a copyright infringement. Intellectual property right pertains to a right that gives a producer (either author, artist, composer, inventor or publisher) the exclusive right to produce and distribute expressive work and this expressive work must be reproducible in some tangible form (means it can be copied) on some material like paper, tapes, films, clay or computer disks.

It must be substantially new and lastly, only expressive works can be protected but not the original ideas behind it. Discussion Most business organizations would immediately patent any invention by an employee as a strategic and economic policy to enhance their competitiveness within their industry and further protect themselves from imitations (Andersen 148). There are various country, federal and state laws regarding who owns the rights to an invention (as an example here) discovered or made by an employee.

Generally speaking, it is the employer who has the right to patent an invention by virtue of an employment contract with the employee, who in exchange for wages or a monthly salary, is willing to cede the rights and ownership of such inventions in favour of the company he works for. The new invention is therefore the property of the old employer. It is not absolute, however. There is usually a clause in such employment contracts termed as a “trailing obligation clause” in which a previous employer has the rights to such an invention or innovation for up to between six to twelve months only after the end of employment.

If the company does not show interest in said invention, then the employee owns the rights. The employer organisation has the option of either patenting the invention or not. It is up to the company to decide on this matter since other issues might negate the necessity of the patent application. Reasons could include the conclusion that the invention is not patentable or there is a high cost in detecting and pursuing patent infringements (Davis 148). A primary responsibility of the employer is to explore all possible options regarding the commercial and technical viability of the invention or innovation.

This is especially true in large firms which have big departments devoted to technical research and product development. This means the employer can choose to revise the invention or pursue further technical work and research that will improve the invention and remedy its flaws. The firm cannot hope to market an invention that is flawed as it will destroy its good reputation and brand name; it will further subject it to possible consumer suits if the buyer of