Matt accepts a job offer as a chemical engineer in the R&D department of Tulip Inc., paint- manufacturing company. After accepting the job offer, he signs an employment contract stating that the results of his research would be the sole property of the company. Matt comes up with an innovative paint formula which could withstand extreme temperatures. He receives a promotion and a handsome package for his work. However, he is annoyed that the formula was not patented in his name. In the context of the given scenario, which of the following statements is true?

a. The advances made by Matt on the job fall under the management and control of his organization.

b. Matt's formula is his own intellectual property and he has the right to use it as he sees fit.

c. Since the formula can be patented only by Matt, the company is legally required to pay him 30% of the total profits gained.

d. The company can receive a fine up to $5 million for drawing a contract that is unenforceable. 

Answer:

The correct answer to the asked question is option a. The reason why we say this is because Matt has entered in an employee contract with his organization which clearly says that the research conducted by Matt will be the sole property of the company and he has accepted this term and condition by signing on that physical contract.

Now let's understand why others are false statements:

Option b says that Matt's formula is his intellectual property and he has the right to use it as he sees fit which is technically right but this would have been a scenario only if he has not initiated any contract with his organization. He has agreed to the terms and condition of the contract which is why this statement stands false.

Option c which says that patent can be done by Matt and company should pay him 30% of the profits gained is false because according to Patents Act 1977 the inventions made by employees belong to their company and if a company  chooses to reward an employee for the invention it can.

Option d which says that the company can be fined up to $5 million for drawing an unenforceable contract is also false because Matt has signed the contract in all his active senses without getting influenced from anything. He knew that the contract is unenforceable before signing it.