The Intellectual Property Law Server

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Oct 17th, 2019, 1:48pm

Forums Forums Help Help Search Search Members Members Calendar Calendar Login Login Register Register
   Intellectual Property Forums
  
  
Assignments and Licenses
(Moderators: Forum Admin, JimIvey, JSonnabend)
   Quitclaim
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1 2  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: Quitclaim  (Read 8643 times)
Bill Richards
Full Member
***




   
WWW Email

Posts: 758
Quitclaim
« on: Jun 21st, 2006, 3:45pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Anyone ever heard of a quitclaim type document in the patent context?  That is, whatever rights I do have in this invention, if any, I assign to so-and-so.
IP Logged

William B. Richards, P.E.
The Richards Law Firm
Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights
614/939-1488
TataBoxInhibitor
Full Member
***




   


Posts: 456
Re: Quitclaim
« Reply #1 on: Aug 10th, 2006, 3:46pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

That vocabulary does not fit in the patent context.   Obviously, a quitclaim deed transfers as you have described, but in the land property context, a quitclaim does not provide the buyer any present or future covenants to sue on.   As such, the land could be subject to multiple interests, i.e. adverse possession or other encumbrances, i.e. zoning regs, liens, etc
 
In the intellectual property context, it would seem you either own it or you either assigned it or licensed it.   I am not sure how many other interests could be involved, that could not be proven by verifiable documentation.  Whereas, in the land property context, there can be many interests that are not recorded or otherwise verified.  
 
IP Logged
Bill Richards
Full Member
***




   
WWW Email

Posts: 758
Re: Quitclaim
« Reply #2 on: Aug 10th, 2006, 4:01pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Thanks for the insight.  I'm thinking about a putative inventor who may not be an inventor.  Can he assign whatever rights he may have just to resolve ownership issues?  Rather that get into a "swearing" contest about who is and is not an inventor, just finesse the issue.  (I know, it can be resolved by the patent attorney, but this might save some trouble.  The patent attorney then lists inventors the way they should be and everyone's happy.)
IP Logged

William B. Richards, P.E.
The Richards Law Firm
Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights
614/939-1488
Isaac
Senior Member
****




   


Posts: 3472
Re: Quitclaim
« Reply #3 on: Aug 10th, 2006, 4:20pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Aug 10th, 2006, 4:01pm, Bill Richards wrote:
Thanks for the insight.  I'm thinking about a putative inventor who may not be an inventor.  Can he assign whatever rights he may have just to resolve ownership issues?  Rather that get into a "swearing" contest about who is and is not an inventor, just finesse the issue.  (I know, it can be resolved by the patent attorney, but this might save some trouble.  The patent attorney then lists inventors the way they should be and everyone's happy.)

 
If the party is a putative inventor, you cannot even file the patent application without sorting out inventorship to the extent possible.   As claims are amended, canceled, or added, you are supposed to keep the application up to date.   A quit claim deed to sort out a dispute based on whether or not a party was an inventor sounds fairly problematic.
 
If the quit claim deed was practical, it seems to me that it would be used to sort out a mess involving whether or not there was an obligation to assign or whether or not there had been an assignment, or maybe on whether some condition for assigning had or had not kicked in.  I could probably imagine a fact pattern that would make a quit claim a possible solution, but I've never heard of one being used to disavow any patent rights.
« Last Edit: Aug 10th, 2006, 4:27pm by Isaac » IP Logged

Isaac
RL
Guest
Re: Quitclaim
« Reply #4 on: Aug 31st, 2006, 11:30am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

Someone in a former business is preparing a Quit Claim for me to sign telling me it will free me from any further and potential liability or responsibility for IP that is owned by multiple shareholders from a company prior to the former; of which the former only has a non-exclusive licensing right to the software from the prior--not ownership. I, as are others, are part of the ownership group from the prior, a company that was dissolved over a year ago. I don't feel comfortable with this type of agreement. Seems to me that someone is trying to get something for nothing--and overall, not doing business in a clean and transparent manner. Your thoughts?
IP Logged
Pages: 1 2  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print

« Previous topic | Next topic »
Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.2!
Forum software copyright © 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board