Published 2/12/2015
PATTERNING OF OLED MATERIALS
A method of making a patterned OLED layer or layers. The method uses a shadow mask having, for example, a free-standing silicon nitride membrane to pattern color emitter material with a feature size of less than 10 microns. The methods can be used, for example, in the manufacture of OLED microdisplays.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20150041793.pdf
It appears this patent application is jointly owned by eMagin & the University of Rochester .
Inventors Ching W. Tang & Charles K. Chan Assigned their rights to the University of Rochester .
Inventors Amal Ghosh & Fridrich Vazan Assigned their rights to eMagin .
It is unclear as to what agreement eMagin & the University of Rochester may have struck regarding how either one may license or sell their patent ownership .
Here is an article regarding co-ownership of patents :
http://www.oecd.org/site/stipatents/Session%201.1.%20Van%20Looy.pdf
Some excerpts :
Co-ownership: A legal perspective
No common legal concept of co-ownership
Co-patents in Europe (most EU countries)
• right to exploit the IP for your own benefit without accounting to the others (co-owners)
• But cannot grant a licence or assign interest in the IP without the consent of the other owners
Co-patents in USA
• right to use, sell or license a patent without the consent of the other co-owners (35 U.S.C. 262 Joint owners-Patent Laws 1999)
Also :
Expert Interviews: Insights (1)
• Co-patenting and value appropriation
o Co-patenting creates a duopoly in which joint owners (can) compete against each other for R&D profits (Hagedoorn, 2003)
o IP co-ownership creates uncertainty on the control that each co- owner has on the co-owned IP (interviews)
“Under Swedish law, a co-owner has the right to get rid of the patent and sell his rights. The other co-owner can bid for the rights, but the selling co- owner has the right to sell his ownership to the biggest bidder. This can be a competitor, who uses the patent to compete with the other co-owner”
“There is always a risk that they [i.e. the patent co-owner] will go bankrupt and their rights on the co-patents are sold”
