Abstract: The reasonable sharing of innovation benefits for service inventors is an effective incentive to achieve innovation and implementation of service inventions. The Amendment of Patent Law (Draft) had clarified this incentive method. As the value manifestation of the intellectual achievements and the institutional incentive to promote the transformation of inventions, it is legitimate to share the innovation benefits with the service inventors reasonably. However, the limited "contractual priority", the vague standard of the "reasonable" principle, the restrictive provisions of regulations on state-owned assets, the miscellaneous treatment of the rights related to service inventions, and inadequacy intellectual property operation capabilities of the unit's hinder the realization of the innovation benefits for service inventors. To realize the reasonable sharing of innovation benefits by service inventors, the criterion of "rationality" should be clarified firstly, that is, the reasonable sharing should be confirmed according to the degree of creative contribution of service inventors and the economic benefits generated by service inventions on the basis of procedural justice. Secondly, as a "bundle of rights", the patent right of service invention should be divided into different parts so as to clarify the right relationship. Thirdly, it is necessary to optimize the management system of state-owned service invention, that is, to establish a management system which takes the technology legal system as the core and is compatible with regulations of other domains. Fourth, it is more sensible to encourage the sharing of profits between the unit and the service inventor by agreement. Finally, to realize the mutual benefit between the entity and the service inventor and the transformation and utilization of service invention, it is necessary for the entity to improve the operation capacity of intellectual property.

摘要： 职务发明人合理分享创新收益是实现职务发明创造转化和实施运用的有效激励手段。《专利法（修正案草案）》对此予以了明确。作为职务发明人智力成果的价值体现和促进职务发明人推动发明创造成果转化的制度激励，职务发明人合理分享创新收益具有正当性。但是，有限的“约定优先”、“合理性”标准的模糊对待、国有资产法律法规的限制性规定、职务发明相关权利的杂糅处理和单位知识产权运营能力的不足对职务发明人实现创新收益分享形成掣肘。实现职务发明人合理分享创新收益，首先应明确“合理性”的判断标准，即在程序正义的基础上根据职务发明人的创造性贡献程度和职务发明所产生的经济效益确认收益分享的合理限度。其次，职务发明创造的专利权作为一项“权利束”，应将其分而处之，明晰各参与主体间的权利边界。再次，应优化国有资产属性的职务发明创造的管理体制，探索建立以科技法律制度为核心，兼容其他各部门法律法规的无形资产管理制度。复次，在产权明晰的基础上，应鼓励单位与职务发明人之间通过约定分享收益。最后，实现单位与职务发明人的互利共赢还需要提升单位的知识产权运营能力，以实现职务发明成果的转化利用。