Unless the parties have agreed otherwise, an employee as the inventor has the right to remuneration for the use of that invention, irrespective of the patent protection obtained for it by the employer (Art. 22 in conjunction with Art. 8(1)(2) and Art. 11(3) of the Industrial Property Act).
A patent may increase the value of an invention and, therefore, an employee – under the obligation relationship – may point to the lack of the employer’s required diligence in obtaining patent protection (Art. 11(3) of the Industrial Property Act in conjunction with Art. 354 of the Civil Code) if his/her remuneration for the use of the invention depended on it.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Translated from the Polish by Marcin Skurzak.
About this article
Cite this article
Industrial Property Act, Arts. 8(1)(2), 11(3), 22(1); Civil Code, Art. 354. “Flowmeter Body”. IIC 52, 934–939 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-021-01097-z
- Employee invention
- Water meter
- Lack of registration
- Non-patented invention
- Technical and economic benefit
- Due compensation