The definition of intellectual property developed in common must be considered with the utmost care and is one of the most common areas for future differences of opinion. More often than not, a party will feel that it developed a technology during the JDA period, but that it was developed separately from the JDA and that it should be „separate” and not „shared.” Contrary to popular myth, the invention is generally not the province of the only inventor who works alone. Even Thomas Edison employed large teams of collaborators to develop new inventions. With the increasing complexity of the business, more and more companies are coming together to create new intellectual properties, sometimes in flexible arrangements and sometimes in well-defined joint ventures. All these types of agreements are full of problem possibilities. JDA`s basic planning strategy takes into account three categories of intellectual property rights that need to be considered: „The IP ownership of each party prior to the JDA” IP, which was developed jointly by the parties during the JDA, but which results from work that has nothing to do with the JDA, let me clarify that I consider here, by registration, that the joint development contract between the owner and the landowners should be registered in the sub-government. One of the most common practices is to certify notarial or sign the Joint Development Agreement (JDA) on the Rs 200/-. stamp. The same agreement is submitted to the potential buyer in the form of a registered joint development agreement.

It`s not fair. A rigid definition that defines „in common” everything that happens during the JDA period can be particularly unfair to the party that has the largest research and development establishment, as it is working on a large number of projects. A better definition is to attach it to the extent to which the party relied on the other party and to the extent to which the evolution relates to the JDA theme. As a general rule, an agreement includes a language such as „information developed or developed jointly by one of the parties over the life of the ADA and related to the performance of the party” under the JDA. It is quite normal for the owner of the property to transfer the rights/titles of the property to his family member as part of the family subdivision. These transfers are executed by GPA. In other scenarios, the owner asks the buyer to transfer the money to a family member. The reason for these scenarios is „legacy.” The country is hereditary and, in most cases, I have found that the joint development agreement is signed by 15 to 20 people, including children under the age of 10. In such cases, either one of the landowners holds the GPA of all parties involved, or there is a family agreement between the landowners to allow a person to cede the property through the GPA. In many cases, I have observed that the landowners owned Benami.

Therefore, the buyer should be especially careful. Once the IP is properly classified separately or in common, two other critical questions must be answered: „Who can use the IP” Who controls the IP These concepts are more different than they can appear. The right to use the investigation period is precisely the right to use either the intellectual protection rights of the other parties, the period of investigation developed jointly, or the period of investigation developed separately. On the other hand, the right of control is the right to determine which others, apart from the parties, can use the property developed in common and under what conditions.

888 444 998 biuro@fireshop.pl
888 444 998 biuro@fireshop.pl

© Copyrigths 2021 Fireshop.pl