Employee inventions and works for hire in Japan: A comparative study against the U.S., Chinese, and German systemsTemple International and Comparative Law Journal (2002)
AbstractAlthough legislative provisions on employee inventions and works for hire have existed for years, their application in many countries has been relatively limited. Amid waves of informational revolution and rapid technological advances, however, issues relating to employee inventions and works for hire have gained increased significance. In this day and age, it is imperative that employees' inventive and creative works be judiciously handled under an effective legal system. Since Japanese companies have amassed economic successes throughout the world, it would be interesting and instructive to study the Japanese system regarding employee inventions and works for hire. Accordingly, this article attempts to provide an overview of Japan's regulatory system pertaining to employee inventions and works for hire, focusing on industrial practices. Nonetheless, in view of the trend of university-industry alliance in technological research and development, university practices with respect to employees' inventive or creative works are briefly mentioned. In particular, the following issues are examined: What rights does the employer have in the employee's inventive or creative works? What rights does the employee have in his or her inventive or creative works? For which types of inventive or creative works can the employee obtain compensation? If the employee is compensated or rewarded for inventive or creative works, in what form, for how much, and at what time is the compensation given? In seeking answers to these questions, the Japanese experience is studied against the backdrop of the U.S., Chinese, and German systems.
- employee inventions,
- works for hire,
- comparative study,
Publication DateJanuary 1, 2002
Citation InformationVai Io Lo. "Employee inventions and works for hire in Japan: A comparative study against the U.S., Chinese, and German systems" Temple International and Comparative Law Journal (2002)
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/vai_lo/13/