Answer: is a priori of no need, you’d pay an extra to the lawyer for nothing. Intellectual property can’t be warranted through contract but only through the due registration of whatever in the correspondant high offices of each country, which then can warrant for the protection of those rights, which is not the case for a contractual partner. A contract may mention the existence of such a protection without it though being able to determine the intellectual property by itself.
Why? A contract is an agreement between parts, while intellectual property is the assignment of property, which naturally reverts only to the State through given law. To show this in a more material example which tends to appear more clearly to human eyes:
you have a house. This house is your property thanks to a registration in some dusty offices, which determine a) that this house is located somewhere, with a number, a street, measures and corresponding maps b) that this house has become your property through one of the legally accepted means, that are usually: inheritance, sale or present
Both depend on the state that has a) the registration of the house b) the legal body assuring any transaction
No contract can make of you the owner of the house, except if it is put as warrant for a lend, in which case the transaction is ruled by the specific banking legislation, but even in this case it is not a contract as such: it is the application of this legislation inside of a ruled body of evaluation (tasación), also usually, though not always, depending on the state. (It’s less the case now, where banks allow themselves to evaluate the price of property.) It may though appear as clause inside of the contract, which should look the following way: in case the before going clauses are not respected, applies the legislation ‘b’ on ‘x’ that allows the recovery of property for the same value than ‘z’.
In the case of intellectual property, these rights can be given away in exchange for something, that should be stated through contract. It corresponds actually to the selling of those rights as if it were a house. In this case, the buyer has to give to the owner of the rights a something corresponding to benefit, a money sum, a percentage of benefit, or any other kind of good which may be evaluated, and then, the contract should determine to which extent those rights are given away, in time, extent or other and in which cases, if the contract is broken, the rights fall back to the original owner. It is though of evidence, that even if ‘rights reserved’ implies the acknowledgement of private property on fields of intellectual activity, it is not possible to sell these until they are registered somewhere.
The almost absurd game with intellectual property in our contemporary times, has driven things sometimes almost to unbearable limits, where things are given away which can’t factually not be given away (a name, a signature or other as in the Ines de la Fressange affair) and things not respected which are protected ‘de par soi’, which is to say, by fundamental rights as given back in Constitutions.
Thus: private property is warranted by most constitutions and thus are personal creations, which are to be considered private property. Many ‘civilized’ countries do though allow that someone ‘picks’ ideas, works, etc. from people who are just doing their job mostly in third world countries and register them in their own countries as being theirs, then asking for enormous sums for those rights. In the same line of absurdity is the fact that, for example, pictures or photographs of Russian icons, which are not protected by ‘copyrights or other’ as being ‘a good of the people’, mostly distributed in occidental countries, are registered and sold for thousands.
In some countries, the lack of concept on what can or not be the object of intellectual property protection, has gone so far so as to allow the registration of ‘general concepts’, such as: « I’m the owner of all invention that assures payment through internet » (France), while the funny guy in question can’t assure to be at the origin of all inventions related, and which would be as if if someone registers « Whatever is good to be used to take a meal = a table » in general and without specification. The problem being that it … has been accepted by the office in charge (!) and now … run. (In France.)
Another problem is that, strangely, the very moment a ‘something’ becomes a commercial item, and thus leaving the paths of the ‘personal’ rights reserved, it is subjected to the laws of one country only and is only valid inside of this, except if registered elsewhere, too. To a certain extent, it makes almost disappear the problem of counterfeits, as even an exact copy of something under the same label in China, if the item and logo and name not registered there, the factual property of the chinese producers. You conclude easily that contemporary legal and social behaviour is determined by occidental interests, that assure that: everything that is yours is mine, and what is mine can’t ever be yours, a slightly unjust balance which may produce serious frictions in time.
Conclusion: take care.