Hugo said:
I think my collegue wants to file a patent naming themselves as sole inventor.
I want to file a patent that names us both as co-contributors because I innovated the new concept from my collegue's old design that had flaws, and then my collegue made a prototype with refinements.
Should I file with us both as co-contributors if I expect this to go into a dispute with conflicting patent applications?
Again, inventorship is only appropriate when a person contributed some "inventive spark" that is covered in at least one claim in the patent application. If the colleague's "old design" contained all of the "inventive" steps -- even if it was flawed and didn't work -- and all you did was "refine" the invention so that it did work, then you would not be entitled to be named as an inventor.
As an absurd example, if inventor "A" invents a circular device that makes moving something easier (a wheel), but has no idea how to make a wheel, then B comes along and figures out how to contruct the wheel, then only A would be considered an inventor -- contributing to refinements does not constitute inventorship. Now, if A invented the wheel, but B designed spokes for the wheel without A figuring out the spokes first, and the patent had a claim that included spokes, then A and B would be joint inventors.
Figuring out inventorship can be tricky -- but it is also curcial to the patent, as incorrect inventorship is grounds to have a patent invalidated. If you are wokring with a patent attorney or agent, they can likely help you determine proper inventorship -- if you are doing this on your own, the two of you really need to sit down and discuss this to figure out what is the correct inventorship. Adding an inventor to give them some "credit" or whatever for their hardwork, even though they didn't actually "invent," along with leaving out an inventor out of spite or whatever, are both inventorship problems that could result in invalidation of the patent later on.
