[Article / Designs] Overview of court decisions on employee-created designs (Tsuyoshi Fujimoto, Patent, January 2026)
更新日：4 時間前
Article information
Article type: Publication review
Categories: Designs / Patents
Main topics: Employee inventions / Creators and inventors
First published on this website: October 1, 2026
Display and classification checked: October 1, 2026 (not a revalidation of the legal analysis)
[Article / Designs] Overview of court decisions on employee-created designs (Tsuyoshi Fujimoto, Patent, January 2026)
There have been five cases claiming remuneration solely on the basis of employee-created designs, but no published court decision has awarded it.
Compared with patents (employee inventions), the following differences and points warrant attention in calculating reasonable remuneration.
① Proportion of excess sales: For designs, choosing alternative designs (other designs without a common aesthetic impression) is easier than for patents, so exclusive market advantage tends to be assessed lower.
② Hypothetical royalty rate: This is often assessed at about half the patent royalty rate (approximately 1.5%–2.0%). This is understood as reflecting the substitutability of designs.
③ Employee contribution: As with patents, this is around 5%–10%, but because a creator's individuality is more readily expressed in designs, it may be assessed higher depending on the case.
However, cases to date recognizing a high contribution involved special circumstances, such as an exceptionally strong dependence on the plaintiff personally.
Original article: https://lnkd.in/g8EMHz-t
Related articles
Updates and corrections
Substantive corrections and additions are recorded separately from classification, related links and display changes.
October 1, 2026: First publication of the author's original LinkedIn text on this website. Article type, categories, topic tags, sources and consultation navigation added.
2026-10-01 | Display maintenance: added case references stated in the original or language-alternate metadata; not a revalidation of legal analysis.
2026-10-01 | Name notation: replaced verified Japanese-script personal names with Roman-letter forms in this English article and its navigation. Legal analysis and original publication date unchanged.
