article


Protecting IP rights throughout an outsourcing project


23 March 2009


Imagine for a moment you’ve been outsourcing product manufacture (or research and development, or some other vital service) for a number of years and are now reaching the end of the contract term. Rather than renew the agreement, you would prefer to switch to an alternative supplier, or at least explore the market.

How will you ensure that the next supplier is able to use the Intellectual Property (“IP”) rights built up over the last few years whilst the project has been running? How do you make sure that you continue to own the IP in the project? What about inventions or know-how contributed by the supplier? What rights do you have in respect of these? Can you really afford to lose these rights if you switch supplier?

If these issues are not considered at the start of the contract, any uncertainty plays into the hands of the incumbent supplier who could be reluctant to licence rights to a competitor and could exploit any ambiguity in the drafting to make it more difficult (and expensive) for a competitor to bid for the next contract term.

This article will look at the types of arrangement where IP is shared and what provisions should be made to protect this IP and the businesses that run them.

Why (not) outsource?

Outsourcing manufacturing has become widespread in recent years and the benefits are often obvious. A company choosing to outsource can reduce capital expenditure on plant and machinery, can reduce fixed costs, and can concentrate on its core business. In the current economic climate, the cost benefits have meant that many companies who have for a long time resisted moving production offshore are now being pushed to transfer manufacturing to countries with cheaper manufacturing costs.

Clearly, outsourcing comes with its own risks however and there may be situations where it is arguably never a good idea to outsource. In the pharmaceutical sector for instance, outsourcing production of drugs that are soon to come off-patent could simply give suppliers a head start when it comes to creating a generic form of the drug. Where research and development is core to the business and innovation is highly valued the loss of a part of the business (including potentially a transfer of staff, as a result of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) (“TUPE”) Regulations can be very damaging. For all the cost saving benefits, it is unlikely that an outsourced provider will be as motivated to innovate and improve technology as a valued in-house team.

Preparing to outsource

The risks of an outsourcing going wrong, particularly where valuable IP is at stake means that the due diligence exercise before the agreement is signed is vital, not just for the usual reasons you would need to carry out such an exercise (e.g. to work out what the services and services levels are, to obtain relevant consents, assign necessary contracts or work out to what extent the TUPE Regulations will apply) but also from an IP perspective to work out what IP rights and protectable processes and technology you may be passing to the service provider.

An outsourcing which involves patented processes, technology or other IP will need to be approached carefully to adequately protect the rights that need to be licensed, to cater for any IP which may be created over the course of the contract, to provide remedies if things do not go to plan, and to allow the contract to wind down smoothly at the end of its term.

Background IP Rights

Before entering into an outsourcing agreement, it is important to identify and protect the rights you will be bringing to the outsourcing and to identify what protectable rights already exist in your technology that you might need to give access to (“Background IP Rights”). Having no doubt made a substantial investment in the development of these rights, you would not want a competitor to get access to them or for the service provider to continue to use – or improve upon them post-contract. You may be able to list the rights in a schedule of registered rights or applications for rights, or by reference to types of services or technology. It is also a good idea to keep a record of what you provide or disclose to the other parties and copies of this correspondence.

There should be clear provisions in the outsourcing agreement that reserve ownership in the Background IP Rights to the party providing them. If the other party or parties to the arrangement need to use your Background IP Rights in the development, implementation or supply of the products then they should be required to obtain the requisite formal user licences under the agreement. Such licences are typically non-exclusive, royalty free, and limited to the purposes of the development, implementation and/or supply of the products and to the duration of the outsourcing arrangement. It is also worth considering whether any third party IP will be used; if this is the case, the necessary licences should be procured.

If the process to be outsourced is such that products cannot be obtained easily from another supplier, you may need to include ‘step in’ rights that allow you to take over the process in the event of the Supplier’s failure or are facing financial problems, particularly if the products are components in a larger manufacturing process. In order to exercise these step in rights you may need licences over the Supplier’s Background IP rights.

These issues must be addressed at the outset of any outsourcing arrangement and not at the end of the relationship when you may have little or no bargaining power and may be trying to seek consent from a supplier who may not be minded to co-operate with an incoming Competitor. There are also a number of practical steps that can be followed to help protect your position with respect to the IP rights arising in connection the services being provided.

Confidentiality and NDAs

Not all information and materials that you have to disclose to the supplier will attract IP protection but it may be possible to rely on the law of confidentiality to protect important information and know-how. Indeed, confidentiality obligations in respect of background and foreground rights can be another way of helping to prevent suppliers from providing the same services to your competitors.

Whether or not a confidentiality agreement is entered into, you should ensure that confidentiality obligations are included in the agreement itself, and that you do not disclose any confidential information until the agreement is signed. You should also be careful only to disclose information that is necessary for the development and supply of the product and only to those who need to see it.

Before disclosing information (even under the terms of a confidentiality agreement), it is worth taking time to consider whether you need to actually disclose it at all. Clearly there is likely to need to be a certain amount of due diligence by the supplier, who may need access to confidential records. However, this does not mean that the whole business is fair game, and it is worth separating data and methods of working that a supplier is likely to need to know (numbers of staff, service levels etc) and those that it doesn’t or shouldn’t be aware of (such as sensitive personal data about employees, input costs or future pricing strategies).

Where it is likely a supplier may be creating patentable products, confidentiality is all the more crucial. There may be little practical benefit in obtaining an assignment of rights in patentable technology if the service provider is free to disclose details of this technology and potentially jeopardise a patent application.

Foreground IP Rights:

Over time, manufacturing processes will be refined and improved, and the supplier may create improvements, refinements and new applications and before the agreement is signed, the parties will need to consider who will own the rights in any improvements and any rights in new applications or processes developed (“Foreground IP Rights”). The parties may decide that the ownership of a Foreground IP Right will depend on who generates or pays for the improvement, and it could depend on the type of right or type of technology that is being created.

Practically speaking, you may want to motivate the supplier to create improvements over the course of its provision of the service. Unlike employees, an outsourcing provider cannot claim compensation under s40 Patents Act but without some sort of incentive is not likely to proactively innovate. This might be a reward by way of cash payment or right to exploit the foreground IP rights in other, non-competing areas.

Joint ownership of Foreground IP Rights is generally best avoided, as it can be complex and inhibiting, and often leads to problems where there is a dispute between the parties. If the parties do want to own rights jointly then they must set out clearly in the agreement their user and exploitation rights together with how decisions will be made about the rights concerned and what will happen on termination or expiry of the agreement.

There are clear advantages of taking ownership of the Foreground IP Rights (in particular having ultimate control of the rights) but ownership should be distinguished from the right to use those rights. Just because you may not own the foreground rights does not mean that you cannot have robust and extensive user rights. Often hard-fought and emotionally charged positions over ownership can be undermined by granting wide licences to the other party. You may need to be creative in looking at licensing of foreground IP rights, for example, in the pharmaceutical sector – what should happen if the service provider, over the course of providing the services finds a new use for your patented drug?

Whether you are the owner of the Foreground IP Rights or not, what you need to ensure is that you have the right to use the Foreground IP Rights for the purposes of manufacturing and selling the products, both during the outsourcing arrangement and when the agreement ends.

The supplier may try to place restrictions in the agreement on your use of the foreground rights after the end of the arrangement. You will need to consider carefully whether any such restrictions would or could prevent you from receiving the services in the future other than from that particular supplier and what types of foreground rights are essential to allow another supplier to pick up seamlessly where the previous supplier ended the service.

Finally, if you are not taking ownership of Foreground IP Rights you should still consider what level of involvement you need in the management of those rights. For example, you would want to be notified of any potential infringement of the rights or any allegation that the rights infringe any third party rights. You may also want the right to join in any proceedings relating to the rights or to bring proceedings where the owner does not wish to. Before agreeing to a licence of foreground rights, it is also worth checking the relevant jurisdictions in which those rights are likely to be held to see what rights you might have as a licensee to enforce licensed patents against third parties, as not all jurisdictions are equal upon this point and these rights differ even within the European Union.

When it’s over

The parties must consider at the outset who will control the IP rights when the outsourcing agreement expires or terminates.

As a customer, you will no doubt want to ensure that you have the right to manufacture the product in-house, or to outsource this to another supplier. You will also want the right to use or sub-contract the relevant foreground rights for such purpose and the requirement that you might have to use background rights owned by other parties and upon which the foreground rights depend.

Typically, third party licences will be more limited in nature, but it is important to secure at the outset ‘post agreement licences’ for the foreground and background rights. If you find yourself having to negotiate such licences at the end the arrangement you will not have a lot of bargaining strength. You could be faced with the dilemma of either paying a small fortune for the right to use IP rights for something for which you have already paid or having to set up your manufacturing process again from scratch. Of course, the discussion that you have with the potential supplier at the outset might also reveal whether or not there are issues that you will need to deal with later on and whether in fact the supplier you have chosen is the right one for the project.

Depending on the type of products involved, you may either want to restrict the supplier from using your Foreground IP Rights entirely or may be prepared to permit the supplier to use the Foreground IP Rights on the proviso that they do not licence to direct competitors or in the same field of activity. If this approach is adopted then you must try to define within the agreement who will qualify as a competitor so that there is some degree of certainty for the parties.

As with most issues on outsourcing projects, preparation is everything and the best time to get the detail right is at the beginning of a project, when the supplier is keen to win the work, competition is at its fiercest and you still have the ability to choose another supplier if you had to. Getting it right in the early stages can prevent many costly battles later on and mean that you are not asking yourself awkward questions when looking for the next supplier.

This article was first published in Patent World

save to PDF

return to press office
return to press office
click here to return to the press office
more