0

THE EMPLOYEE expressly acknowledges that pursuant to Article 163 of the Mexican Labor Law, all rights to any inventions, improvements and any intellectual property rights (“Intellectual/Industrial Property Rights”), made, written, designed, developed or produced by THE EMPLOYEE for the duration of this contract, is property of THE EMPLOYER and must be assigned to the latter. THE EMPLOYER will have the right to freely develop and alter such Intellectual/Industrial Property Rights and to license and assign them to third parties. THE EMPLOYEE agrees to promptly disclose any invention, improvement or intellectual property during the course of employment and undertakes without any additional compensation to execute all such deeds and documents that, at THE EMPLOYER’s sole discretion, are necessary or desirable in order for THE EMPLOYER being able to protect, register, maintain and in any other way be able to fully enjoy its right of intellectual property referred to under this section. THE EMPLOYEE must notify THE EMPLOYER in writing with respect to any invention, improvement or intellectual property conceived before the signing date of this contract. Absence of such notice will result in any invention, improvement or intellectual property devised by THE EMPLOYEE to be subject to the obligations above.

This clause looks incredibly suspicious to me wrt the potential for abuse, especially the last sentence. Or is my interpretation wrong and this clause doesn't mean that the company can seize any IP that I "conceived" before employment and didn't notify the employer about?

If this is the actual meaning, can such a clause be actually enforced or it has no legal power?

1

the company can seize any IP that I "conceived" before employment and didn't notify the employer about?

Only if your pre-existing IP could be reasonably alleged to have ensued pursuant to your employment. Your notification preemptively strikes the presumption that that IP ensued during employment.

IP (pre-existing or otherwise) that clearly is unrelated to your job responsibilities would not need to be disclosed. That is because that IP is beyond the scope of the contract/employment. However, the wider the scope of your job responsibilities (or how these are phrased), the riskier that the clause might be construed to encompass your pre-existing, non-disclosed IP.

can such a clause be actually enforced or it has no legal power?

It is enforceable to the extent that you are given the opportunity to timely exclude from employer's "inventory" or "assets" your prior IP. That being said, proving that you created your non-disclosed IP before the contract was entered would defeat the clause because a contract cannot contravene legislation (in this case, article 163 of the Mexican Labor Law).

If you produce a notification, it is in your best interest to secure some evidence that the employer received it. Otherwise, you are giving the employer the opportunity to steal your disclosed prior IP by falsely denying that you gave a notification listing it. Requiring the employer to sign a [receipt-]copy is the most straightforward approach to secure that evidence.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.