Abstract:In the last few decades, a valuation of intangible assets is an activity of particular importance, not only because of growing number of transactions with intangibles but for accurate fi nancial reporting as well. In this discipline, a special area is dedicated to the research of diff erent factors that aff ect the value of intangibles. Royalty rate, a price of the licensed intangible, is a typical measure of an intangible asset´s value. This research paper aims at testing empirically selected factors that have been identifi ed by theoretical literature as well as by licensing practice as relevant in determining the level of royalty rates. For this purpose, a multi-factor linear regression model is built using the latest possible sample of licensing transactions from consumer durables industry from 2002 to 2006. The authors make tests of dependent variable (royalty rate) on fi nancial factors as well as on factors coming from diff erent provisions of licensing agreements. Based on a sample of 67 transactions, the fi nancial factors revealed themselves to be statistically negligible, while some license provisions, in particular the extent of rights granted and the license term appeared to be highly signifi cant in determining the royalty rate level.

PurposeReasonable remuneration of employee inventions is a controversial issue causing court litigations among employees and employers in many countries. The paper aims to shed light on the missing economic interpretation of the reasonable remuneration of employee inventions. Specifically, it focuses on the concept of “reasonability” at the issue.Design/methodology/approachIn an empirical qualitative multiple case-study setting, the paper explores inductively Czech corporate employee inventors' remuneration systems, using typological analysis and M. Weber's interpretative theoretical construct of “ideal type.”FindingsAt the first level, reasonability is a function of multi-amount rewarding, a certain level of total remuneration and identifiable benefits being a decisive factor. Additionally, the reasonability is conceptualised as a function of two dimensions – timing/risk and benefit–reward relation. At the second level, the reasonability is interpreted as a concept balancing seven points of view: timing, materiality, equity, risk management, transparency, system costs and exactness. At the third level, the paper offers an optimal remuneration system like the one that optimises developed seven-criterion framework.Research limitations/implicationsEven if analysed within one-country and nine-company context, the insights are generalisable across a broader sample of countries with statutory rules for employee inventions. Studying more cases may enrich the findings. The findings are based merely on a rational perspective and do not deal with psychological aspects of employees.Practical implicationsThe results may be helpful for intellectual property or R&D managers in building or reorganising employee invention remuneration systems within corporations. The developed seven-criteria model can serve as a discussion framework; the suggested optimal system as a reference point. The results may serve as well to consultants, judges or other parties involved in currently growing employee–employer controversies and litigations. The analysis may fuel public policy decisions, too.Originality/valueThe paper brings unique and detailed empirical insights into the issue of employee inventions. It offers a complex multi-perspective (employee/employer) framework through which the reasonability can be discussed and suggests an optimal system, which can serve as a reference point.

No abstract

Remuneration of employee inventions in corporations is a relatively controversial topic in the field of intellectual property, and in many countries, there are ongoing lawsuits over the amount of remuneration between the inventor and the employer. The available scholarly literature as well as professional sources suggest that there are many ways to how a country approaches remuneration legislation and practice, however there is a lack of homogenization of these approaches. To fill this gap, this chapter aims to find and define several recognizable types of compensation that exist in the world and their underlying principles and theories. We use an Eisenhardt’s comparative template for qualitative theory-building research (multiple case study) and formulate four recognizable types of approaches to the remuneration of employee inventions. The results of this chapter can serve, for example, innovative corporations in the correct setting of the reward mechanism for employee inventions when entering various foreign markets.

No abstract