Intellectual Property Lawyers for Birmingham, Alabama

A Patent Assignment Agreement transfers ownership of an invention or patent rights from the inventor, known as the assignor, to another party, often a company serving as the assignee. To protect your business and ensure enforceability, the agreement should cover specific provisions that make the transfer clear, complete, and legally sound. What Is the Core Assignment Clause? The assignment clause is the heart of the agreement. It should use present-tense language such as “hereby assigns, transfers, and conveys all right, title, and interest.” Courts and the USPTO treat this as an immediate transfer, while “will assign” is only a future promise. The clause should also cover continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part applications, along with reissues, reexaminations, and foreign filings. What Rights Should Be Transferred? The assignee should receive the full bundle of rights granted under 35 U.S.C. § 154, including the right to make, use, sell, offer for sale, import, and license the invention. The agreement should also transfer the right to sue for past, present, and future infringement, so the company can recover damages even for activity that occurred before the assignment was signed. Do You Need Consideration? Every contract requires consideration, and patent assignments are no different. Even if the transfer is to your own company, the agreement should recite consideration. This can be nominal, such as “ten dollars and other good and valuable consideration,” or it can be tied to equity or to your role as founder. How Should the Patent Be Identified? The intellectual property should be identified with precision. If a patent has issued, include the number and issue date. For pending applications, list the application number, filing date, and invention title. If no application has been filed yet, provide a detailed description and later update the record once official filing details exist. What Warranties and Representations Are Common? The assignor should warrant ownership of the rights, authority to assign, and absence of liens or conflicting assignments. Over-warranting should be avoided. Do not guarantee novelty or validity, since those are determined by the USPTO and courts. Be cautious about warranting sole inventorship unless you are certain no other inventors contributed, since misstatements on inventorship can create validity problems. What Other Provisions Should Be Included? Other common provisions include further assurances requiring the inventor to assist with future filings, litigation, or USPTO actions, a limited power of attorney for patent prosecution and enforcement, and improvements clauses that attempt to capture future modifications or developments. Improvements provisions must be drafted carefully, as vague scope language can lead to disputes. The agreement should also address corporate authority, ensuring the company has approval under bylaws or state law before accepting the assignment. What Administrative Details Matter? The agreement should contain standard contract terms such as governing law, entire agreement, amendment requirements, successors and assigns, and dispute resolution through arbitration or mediation. Both the inventor and the company should sign, and notarization is advisable because it makes USPTO recordation smoother. Do You Need to Record with the USPTO? After execution, the assignment should be recorded with the USPTO through the Electronic Patent Assignment System. Recordation should occur promptly after execution to establish clear priority and maintain a clean chain of title. While recordation is not required for validity between the parties, it protects ownership against third-party claims. The USPTO currently charges little or no fee for electronic filings, so this step is inexpensive and essential. Should You Assign or License? An assignment transfers complete ownership, which investors generally expect. A license keeps ownership with the inventor while granting defined rights to the company. Licensing may be useful when the inventor wants to retain control, license the technology to multiple companies, or test the market before giving up ownership. For most startups, assignment is the preferred approach. What About Tax Considerations? Assignments can have tax consequences, especially when IP is transferred for equity or other forms of consideration. Professional tax advice is essential to evaluate both immediate tax effects and ongoing obligations. This is particularly important if the company later earns royalties or sells the patent. What Are the Next Steps? The implementation process should include drafting the agreement with qualified legal counsel, executing it with proper corporate authority and notarization where possible, recording it promptly with the USPTO using EPAS, and consulting a tax professional to address both the transfer itself and any ongoing obligations. If you need help drafting or reviewing a Patent Assignment Agreement, the attorneys on Contracts Counsel can guide you through the process so that your company’s rights are fully protected.

As a legal entity, a joint venture (JV) can own a patent. Given the temporary nature of JVs and the fact that there will be multiple owners of any patents, there is a complex mix of intellectual property (IP) ownership rights, dispute resolution, and enforcement issues that need to be agreed upon in order to properly protect everyone's intellectual property rights. Consideration will need to be given to what IP ownership and rights will look like during and after the JV and it may be easier to have both companies listed as the patent authors for inventions from the outset (versus naming the JV as the author). A joint IP agreement is the best solution to outline the rights of each party, the process for developing patentable technologies sufficient to be a patent author, filing and prosecuting patents, and future licensing and exploitation of the patent.

Do you have a license to use the intellectual property? Consult with an attorney.

You might think that because you wrote the code, you have the right to share it, but that’s not how developer agreements usually work. In Washington State, these contracts are enforceable, and they can absolutely stop you from sharing or reusing code you created during a project. It really comes down to ownership, and under most contracts, that ownership belongs to the company, not you. Let’s Talk About Who Owns the Code When you sign a developer agreement, you’re usually agreeing to one of two things: either it’s a “work-for-hire” deal or you're assigning your intellectual property rights. Either way, the result is the same. The company owns whatever you build for them. Since they own it, they get to decide what happens to it. Even if you’re the one who wrote every line, that doesn’t mean you have the right to reuse or share it if you’ve already signed those rights away. This kind of setup is standard in the tech world. Companies need to protect their IP, especially when it includes competitive advantages or trade secrets. That’s why they ask developers to assign rights and agree to keep things confidential. What About Washington State Law? Washington does offer some protection to developers, but it’s limited. There’s a statute, RCW 49.44.140, that says employers can’t claim ownership of inventions you created entirely on your own time, using your own resources, and completely unrelated to their business. That sounds helpful, but here’s the catch. It only applies if you’re an employee, not an independent contractor. And even then, the second your work overlaps with their business or involves any company resources, the protection probably doesn’t apply. So if the code you’re writing is part of a contract, or even just loosely connected to the company’s business, then the company likely owns it. Why This Matters If you violate the agreement, you’re not just risking a slap on the wrist. The company could send a takedown notice to GitHub, file for an injunction, or even sue for breach of contract or copyright infringement. If the code includes anything proprietary, like business logic or algorithms, they might also go after you for trade secret misappropriation. And beyond the legal problems, there’s your reputation to think about. Word travels fast in development circles, especially in local communities. Getting labeled as someone who mishandles IP can make future contracts harder to land. How to Protect Yourself The good news is that you still have leverage before you sign. A lot of companies start with broad IP assignment language, but they’re often open to carving out exceptions. You can ask to include a “prior inventions” schedule that lists tools, frameworks, or libraries you already created. That way, you can keep using your own work in other projects. If open-source contribution is important to you, say so upfront. Some companies will allow developers to contribute non-proprietary or generic components to open-source projects, especially if those contributions don’t compete with their business. Just make sure it’s all clearly spelled out in writing and approved in advance. You might also negotiate a time limit on confidentiality terms. The company will likely want to own the core project code permanently. That doesn’t mean you can’t eventually talk about general techniques or patterns you used, especially after some time has passed. Smart Moves Before You Sign Before you agree to anything, take a moment to list any existing code or tools you plan to use. Try to get those explicitly excluded from the IP assignment, or at least confirm that you’ll retain the right to use them elsewhere. And again, if open-source is part of your career plan, be upfront. Get language in the contract that allows you to publish select components with written approval. If you develop a useful utility during the project and think it might have broader uses, talk to the company before the contract ends. See if they’d be open to letting you open-source it or license it back to yourself for use in future projects. When It’s Time to Bring in a Lawyer If all this feels high-stakes, and it often is, consider having a tech-savvy attorney take a look. A good lawyer can help spot overly aggressive clauses, suggest better language, and help you protect both your rights and your long-term goals. This is especially important if you’re actively contributing to open-source or if you’ve built up your own libraries over time. A little legal help now can save you a lot of trouble later.

Since the user uploaded copyrighted material to your website without your knowledge, generally you will not be automatically liable under the DMCA “safe harbor” provision. As you have already removed the content, make sure that your site has a published DMCA policy and that you have registered your designated agent with the U.S. Copyright Office. Generally, if you have everything in place, most of these matters are resolved without ongoing liability. Feel free to reach out if you need guidance on setting up a policy and agent registration.