| Nowadays，the pattern of global economic growth has converted into a mode ofknowledge economy growth. Scientific and technological innovation have become thekey factor that determines a countries’ economic growth power and itscompetitiveness in the world. In the same way, employee invention, should also beentreated as a power to enhance an enterprise’s competitiveness. However, the fact isthat the number of employee invention application in our country is in a low level, thedispute between the enterprise and the inventor or creator grow rapidly. There is nogood way to find out the exact profit gain from the invention, then "one award, tworewards" system may not work in reality, the initiative of the inventor and creator willbe stricken, and what’s worse, it become a common phenomenon that some inventorswill keep the invention till their retirement, some even choose to leave theirenterprises. The above fact will impair a company’s competitiveness, and also becomean obstacle in our nation’s development in the future scientific and technological. Toconstruct a good reward system has become more and more important to keep theemployers’ investment remain enthusiasm and employee stay initiative.This paper will indicate the problems in both legislation and law practice in thefirst place, and try to analysis the shortage of the system, for example, the definitionof the employment invention is not clear enough, the reward is offered in a limited way, the benchmark of the reward is hard to measure, the provision of the regulationor the consultation doesn’t work in balancing the interests of both side, the promisesmade by the enterprises are constantly failed, the cost in safeguarding the rights andinterests are extremely high, the punishment of violating the rule is not forbidden bythe regulation, etc.This author will cite the different employment invention system and theirrelevant methods of payments in Germany, U.S. and French. To learn from French"Task invention", we suggest to reduce the scope of employment invention, clarifyenterprises’ responsibility in rewarding in different industry; to learn from thecharacteristic of the autonomy of the will in U.S., we recommend to set an authorityto do the examination; to learn from the detailed implemental approach in Germany"Guideline for the Remuneration of Employees’ Inventions in Private Employment",we advise that we should confirm the different way of evaluation in legal, technologyand economic aspect, hope we can establish a more clear and quantified benchmark.Based on the analysis and lessons above, combining the employment inventionsituation in our country, some suggestion are provided below: first, at the legislativelevel, we could narrow down the scope of employment invention, and someagreements should be announced invalid for its unreasonableness or unfairness, weshould also advise the enterprise to clarify the benchmark in rewarding the inventor orcreator when the invention is used in a different way. The legal standard of the rewardis going to be improved, and simultaneously enrich its form, improve the relevantsupervision measures. In the practice, we recommend to authorize a department toreview the contract both substantially and procedurally, improve the mechanism ofevaluation of intellectual property, that is to say, to protect the inventor’s right toknow, and also protect the business information from leaking out, try to reasonablyand scientifically make the evaluation in a multi-dimensions way. |
PDF Full Text Request