Section 134 of the Israel Patent Law allows for a committee including the Commissioner of Patents, a judge and one other to decide whether an employee is entitled to compensation for a service invention, and how much this should be.
In Barzani vs. Iscar, the Supreme Court through out Barzani’s appeal of the committee ruling and denied his request for compensation.
The Israel Supreme Court (Appeal 3564/12 Dr Nimrod Bayer vs Florality LTD) overturned a District Court decision that upheld a waiver signed by Dr Bayer and Dr Nimrod Bayer requested that the committee decide on appropriate compensation. The committee chaired by Judge Professor Itzhak Engelard and including the Commissioner of Patents Asa Kling and Professor Shmuel Peleg. issued a ruling on 24 December 2015.
It seems that in this instance, the parties came to an agreement. Consequently the request for compensation submitted to the committee was refused. The ruling clarifies that this decision does not affect Dr Beyer’s moral rights to be considered the technological driver of the company or affect third party rights. It puts an end to the issue and no costs are awarded but the decision is published with the names of the parties at their request.
We suspect that the anonymous suspension procedure we reported in 2014 related to this case. Not much can be learned from this ruling except that the committee does meet. At least occasionally.
Categories: employee, Israel IP, Israel Patent, Israel Patent Office, moral rights, Patents, service invention, Uncategorized, אמצאת שירות, בית משפט, החלטת בית משפט, החלטת רשות הפטנטים, פטנט, פטנטים, קניין רוחני, קנין רוחני