[JCPNEXT4-23] Problems when non-member companies encourage their employees to join as individuals Created: 22/Nov/12 Updated: 30/Jul/14 Resolved: 29/Jul/14
|Remaining Estimate:||Not Specified|
|Time Spent:||Not Specified|
|Original Estimate:||Not Specified|
In order to avoid paying membership fees companies sometimes do not join the JCP themselves but instead encourage one or more of their employees to join as individuals, typically in order to join an Expert Group.
Under these circumstances the employee may well be acting as an "Agent" of the employer, and may (deliberately or inadvertently) contribute IP belonging to the employer, but the employer makes absolutely no IP grants. (Exhibit B simply asserts that the employer releases the employee of any claims over "personal" IP that the employee may otherwise have owned.)
In other words, the protection provided by the Royalty-Free grants in respect to Contributions to a particular JSR and the RAND grants in respect to essential patents for other JSRs are completely absent.
1) The work of an Expert Group that the employee is participating in may become "contaminated" by IP belonging to the employer (without any legal grant of IP rights.)
2) The employer avoids the obligation to make RAND grants with respect to essential patents for JSRs that the employee does not participate in.
|Comment by heathervc [ 24/Apr/14 ]|
There is also the issue of whether the Exhibit B should remain written 'per JSR' or should be 'per Individual'. There are cases of Individual Members interested in joining the JCP without a particular JSR of interest at the time.
|Comment by pcurran [ 29/Apr/14 ]|
See the document Notes on Exhibit B for an analysis of the problem we're trying to solve and a proposed solution.
|Comment by heathervc [ 06/May/14 ]|
We will discuss the document on Exhibit B at the London May 2014 F2F meeting.
|Comment by pcurran [ 29/Jul/14 ]|
Since we have a separate issue (#38) to address the contents of "Exhibit B" (now the Employer Contribution Agreement) I believe the remaining suggestions/problems in the issue have been addressed.
|Comment by jpampuch [ 30/Jul/14 ]|
First issue, fees, is addressed by eliminating all fees for all members. (3.1.6)
This issue can be closed.