Make sure they are yours to patent!...you may well find the company that employs you owns any inventions that even vaguely relate to it's business, even if 'invented' in your own time.

I suspect that about 98% of patents are a waste of money and time.

Unless it's really big business it's hardly worth the effort. If it is big business can you afford to uphold patents in India and China? Maybe sell the IP rights for a fee + royalty (royalties are brilliant as they will provide ongoing revenue).

If you sell to a big company they may well be able to afford the expense of protecting the idea, and also manufacture and promotion.

I think it's making that scale judgement between a cottage industry that doesn't need protection and a serious business opportunity ... we all would love to think our ideas are Worth a fortune....they seldom are.

I don't mean to sound negative...I'm just thinking about your cash!

Good luck

Del

(PS. The company I used to work for has a couple of patents of mine, none of which is worth a jot...they paid for them...)

I agree to you that most of patents are no use

I was told that in usa there is a big money for the patient application. but most of them can be implimented by another way. espeically circuit, as I know.

IN china, some of patients are only for some political capital. only a little are very useful. At first most of chinese feel mystories of the patients, some of institutions apply many patients, but they find they cannt get back benefit from it but pay more and more money for every years protection.

I wonder what s the best way to get benefit from your wonderful idea?

I am with you on this one Del. I think that in most cases patents arent worth the time or effort unless they are going to be sold for big money; even then it is questionable. I'll give a case in point.

I had a friend who is now deceased that worked in Research for a major US Steelmaking corporation. He developed a process for quenching of blast furnace coke. The company proceeded to patent it. It seems that someone in Holland also submitted a patent for the exact same process on the very same day. The patent office had no option, so they issued two identical patents for the identical process on the same day (to prevent anyone suggesting that the other had infringed on their patent).

Who gains in patent protection in that case? Both companies can sell the same process, but no one has exclusive rights.

I was told patents only were protected in recieved state.

so if you Smith apply in usa, usa protect your patent, if you John apply in holland, holland protect it. John's products cannt be selled in usa and Smith products cannt be seld in hoolland. otherwise, they will pay other side charge.

they can all sell their products to the third country, say in China. no problem on the patent, unless one of them apply in China as well.

Patents are not deigned as protection in the sense that many perceive protection. They are designed to allow the holder a means to offensively defend the holders right to the sole rights of product described. The holder must then use the tool (patent) in court and prove that a violation has taken place. It is very discouraging.

I am left scratching my head. I have a few products which may not be earth shattering but that I would like recognition for. I would also like to profit whatever meager profits I may but am stymied as to how to go about it. I have 30+ plans for rather simple low cost products and no way to insure, protect, produce or develop.

cr3

Hi CR3,

'I have a few products which may not be earth shattering but that I would like recognition for. I would also like to profit whatever meager profits I may but am stymied as to how to go about it. I have 30+ plans for rather simple low cost products and no way to insure, protect, produce or develop.'

That sounds like a good thread question!

Del

International patents exist by international treaty. Whether they are respected by the signatories to that treaty is a different story altogether.

We had a similar instance in which we got our patent first, another company got almost the same identical patent but had filed earlier and had it granted later, and a third company from Germany which was actually the first to file and the last patent to be granted. Fortunately it never turned into a blood bath because none of us could ever hope to recoup the cost of litigation on the device in question.

When we asked the USPTO why this was, they referred us to an earlier published statement which basically said it was not their charter or responsibility to deal with conflicting patents, only to deem if the patent submission was in fact patentable. It was up to the 'industry' to sort out areas of overlapping patents (i.e. litigation, agreements, etc).

Lead free solders is an even bigger nightmare with as many as 90 overlapping patents on the most common lead free solder formulations used today.

DEL is right. Most patents give you nothing more than bragging rights. At the low end you will probably spend around $3-5K. If it requires a complicated search and review across a number of disciplines then the cost will climb.

You can do a lot of the prior art search yourself at www.uspto.gov and use their patent search with every keyword you can think of. Still, most patent attorneys will have better access and methods to do the search, but every hour you can shave off their time reduces your overall cost.

People and companies typically get patents for 1 of 3 reasons:

1. Prevent/discourage others from Manufacturing (at an average cost of $2M for defending your patent this is a hollow challenge for most individuals) but if you have something that is REALLY and TRULY earth shattering, you should do it. If it falls under the NEAT category, you may want to rethink your best course of action.

2. Create a sense of IP (Intellectual Property) for driving up the value of a company. (Only good if you plan to sell it off). Since almost every patent can be circumvented in one way, shape, or form the real worth is in the ingenuity and consistent devleopment capabilities that the IP shows is within the company.

3. Protect your right to make it the way you want and discourage others from taking your idea and patenting it themselves. (Perhaps, the most common nowadays) Under the new US Patent guidelines, it is strictly a 'first to file' that gets the patent, even if you've been building the thing before anyone else. More anemic help from our government ran entities, I'm afraid, that benefit large business far more than small businesses or individuals.

I didn't list "bragging rights" as a reason, because you really don't need it for that, nor did I list "to sell my idea" since that almost never happens anymore. Although I have four patents myself, I would only consider myself a novice at this and if it were up to me, only 1 of the 4 would have ever been submitted.

Lastly, the 2+ years it takes to get your patent granted(assuming you did your prior Art search thoroughly and there are no complications), you may want to consider the life cycle of the product you will be using it for. It it is less than 5 years, then chances are it will likely not buy you much of anything.

If you do as much as you can on your own, you should be abel to get by for about $2-2.5K per patent including the filing and issuance fees. I hope this helps. You may be able to save some money if you do them both at the same time, with the same patent attorney, and they are somewhat related.

I hope this helps.

Get your hands on a copy of Patent It Yourself for some of the best patent advice anywhere, bar none.

It is an excellent book from "Nolo Books". I paid $7 US at a used book store.

cr3

Escape Pod: The other viewpoint is to be found on <tinaja.com> Search for "Patents." where the topic is covered in bits and pieces in several different (free download) documents.

Be sure you can afford the cost of the Patent vs. the perceived value of same. Basically it is license to sue in the event someone infringes on the patent and doesn't guarantee recovery of loss and/or attorney fees.

One thing to be aware of, if you have discussed the invention in part or full with anyone, and I do mean anyone, they are automatically enjoined in law as co-owners. The other posts about costs are correct in my experience. If you truly think what you have is earth shattering, then appoint an attourney.....period,

Cheers,

TC

Timpatco,

I don't know about Thailand, but this is definitely not true here in the US. I would find this to be a bizarre law anywhere. In fact, we were always encouraged to have a witness sign the notebook pages where a potential patentable idea is recorded, and the idea must be understood by the witness.

I don't know if the laws have changed, but in the US you have 1 year after disclosing (by presenting a paper etc.) before you file.

Finally, the inventor owns the patent, unless he decides to sell it. I believe the law requires that this be a proven transaction, with money exchanged. My company used to give a token dollar to the inventor. No one is a "co-owner" unless the inventor allows it. In fact, adding names to the inventor who did not participate in the invention can make a patent invalid.

Escape Pod-You may want to look at a provisional patent. This can be submitted 1 year prior to the actual patent application. It is cheap and can be done fairly easily. It protects your idea for a year before you have to go through the expensive patent process. You can always decide later whether to patent it later, or to sell the assignment to others.

Otherwise, I tend to agree with the other folks. For a large company, they have the funds to defend a patent. If they violate your patent, they also have the funds to defend their violation, and tie an individual up in court until you end up out of funds.

Tad

The venue is Australia not Thailand and the situation arises because of the rules of "prior art". So in other words, you may very well lodge a application in the US or anywhere for that matter, but if an individual can prove (in court) they were "involved" before the lodgement date your Patent is screwed. I agree with the general concencus here, the patent system is nowadays rendered virtually null and void as a result of certain countries cynical disregard for the system. What to do? IMHO, Trash it and all the parasitic legal structure that goes with it. Why do we manufacture in Thailand? Because we dont have to put up with the outmoded overheads such as legal costs, NOT because of "cheap labour" . do we respect others inventions as a matter of course but we prefer better engineering and marketing to ensure our future, NOT a roomful of costly lawyers.

Study the rules and and old patents to get some idea of how they are structured. UK patents are the best structured in my view. Search and search and search, see esp@cenet document view and in particularly http://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-law-manual-practice.ht. There is a lot of guidance there. There are other sites especially U.S. and European. Practice preparing with some idea that is not too important to you and go through the process of filing just to learn the ropes. Remember, a patent is for what it is and not how it works. Only engage a patent agent/attorney as a last resort unless you are very rich and can afford paying for very little. Do it just for fun and satisfaction and not to get rich.

Finally, EUROPIUM mentioned "Patent it Yourself". Good advice I think. He provided a link so I wont bother with ISBN etc. All the best.

Once you get your patent, I can get a copy of it and Reverse Engineer around it so I can produce the same thing with improvements! So much for Patent protection.

In the old days, B.C. (Before China,) I would apply for a Patent, then put Patent Pending on the item. This slows down the Copy Cats as they have no way of knowing how many points the patent covers. This gives about a 2 year exclusive before someone comes out with a copy.

But now it seems that our government does nothing to protect US industries from foreign copies.

Trade Restrictions against the countries whose economies are built of the theft of US and other countries Patents?
Not while these countries have lobbyists in Washington handing out millions to our Senators and Representatives.

So, good luck!

PS; One example: China does such a good job of copying Honda Motorcycles that the parts are interchangeable. The main difference being the poor quality of the Chinese materials being used to make the parts.

go to www.uspto.gov and follow meticulously their advices

I'm hoping jhammond chimes in here since he's an experienced, degreed engineer and later became a patent agent.

DaveB,

I was going to pass on this one since much of it is a discussion of "is a patent worth anything or not," and I find engaging in these sorts of arguments on the internet aren't that likely to change anyone's mind. So I'll make a few comments and let it go at that. Everyone can and should do their own research and come to their own conclusions.

First off, as a patent practitioner, I am certainly pro-patent in general. No big surprise there. I believe that a patent can in many instances be a valuable property right that can generate value and money in various ways.

That being said, getting a patent on an invention is a business decision and should be evaluated against certain criteria. Like any other investment, it has to have a reasonable likelihood of generating a satisfactory return. Not an easy thing to do, and there are several pathways to consider. Will the inventor or company try to just license the patent, or will they also do all of the R&D, manufacturing and marketing; or some portion of those? Somebody has to do every one of those if any money is to be made. Individual inventors who come to me thinking that "if I just get a patent on my invention, the world will beat a path to my door" get a big reality check. It doesn't happen. I tell them the patent is just one small part of commercializing an invention and the heavy lifting is in manufacturing and marketing. So don't expect to get a 30% royalty just for the piece of paper, no matter how good your invention is. It will likely be in the single digits for just a license, and probably the low single digits. Still, that could be a pretty good return for just doing the patent part of commercialization.

One common notion, that if you have a patent, companies will find a way to get around it or just infringe it and say "Sue us" has some justification. Regarding the former, often a patent does not have very broad claims, and it is easy to "design around" the claims and make a product that does not infringe. That's a perfectly reasonable business practice, and it's in the public interest as well. The property right provided by a patent should not extend beyond the scope of the claims. As to the latter, i.e. willful infringement, I don't believe that happens commonly in the U.S., although there certainly are unscrupulous companies everywhere and the U.s. is no exception. But the risks (treble i.e. 3X damages) are quite high. More commonly, a company may carefully study a patent and find grounds to invalidate it. Perhaps not all of the relevant prior art was discovered by the Patent Office when it was examined. Perhaps the specification and/or claims were poorly written - either by an inventor representing himself, or by the patent practitioner representing him. Yes, there are incompetent practitioners out there as well.

There is also the perception that to the individual inventor or small company, patents are worthless because the cost of enforcing (litigation) them is way too high. Yes it is VERY expensive, and beyond the means of most individuals or small companies. Yet that is not the end of the story. If a small company has a great product and a solid, broad, strong patent on it, quite commonly there are law firms that will litigate on contingency if they believe the chances of winning and making money on their time are sufficiently high. Upstream from that, better yet, a small company or inventor might find a way to partner with a larger company with far deeper pockets and a more imposing presence. In either case, you have to be willing to share the wealth - to recognize that a modest portion (even sometimes significantly less than 50%) of a large sum is a lot better than 100% of zero. That's simply good business, and not just with respect to patents.

I use this analogy in the case where a patent is being considered for a valuable invention and resulting product (and not all of them are). What if I discovered gold on my land? I don't have the resources to mine the gold, nor do I have the resources to protect it. So would I say, "Well, I'm not going to even try to mine the gold - thieves will find out and they'll come and steal it all anyway. So I'm just going to leave it in the ground and not tell anybody." Would I say that? Heck no. Especially since maybe my neighbor will find the gold on his land and figure out how to dig mine out from under me. I'm going to try to find a way to team up with those who can help mine the gold and get it to a vault, and to share the proceeds with them. (I speak from experience by the way - years ago I failed trying to commercialize one of my inventions by trying to do to much myself, and by the time I wised up, the market wasn't really there anymore.)

Well those are some thoughts for what they're worth. One last thing, in the U.S., the Patent Office website, www.uspto.gov, does have plenty of useful background information, as indicated by others here. As for preparing, filing, and prosecuting your own patent application, not surprisingly, I don't recommend it, but there are plenty of online resources for anyone that wants to give it a try. Just be aware that there is a lot that can go wrong. In my former Fortune 500 engineering career, when I got up to about 15 or so patents, I thought I knew a lot about patents. When I passed the USPTO patent bar exam, I thought I knew even more. Now that I've practiced in the field for more than five years, I've developed a perspective on how much I don't know, and how much I have to continually work to learn the field and stay current. It will always be that way - which helps make it a really interesting 2nd career.

jhammond

__________________________

www.patent-innovations.com

If you are a "POOR" inventor it is better to wait for a Time you can pay

a WW - PTO Patent ( approx. 20k$ -50k$) and find a serious Business Angel

for a STARTUP on your own. I made bad exp.! Best wishes for you.

contact: xxtemp@arcor.de

Good point. There are a lot of crooks out there. There are lots of companies that promise to help you patent your product, and market it to companies. There may be some legitimate folks out there, but my impression is that these companies just take your money, and never really present it to any meaningful potential licensees.

I saw a TV special on one of these firms. After many years in business, and many thousands of clients, they could only claim less than 5 actual license agreements.

Tad

Hi There, Potentional Customer !!

I'd like to earn your trust and your business in this specialized field of

design and engineering graphics. I have over twenty years experience in

design drafting and producing high quality 3-dimensional 'exploded' drawings

of complex machinery and newly invented devices. Please contact me

a.s.a.p. . . . my business mobile phone is (361) 219-7419. I promise that

all confidential & sensitive data and/or intellectual property that is handled

by me will be kept with the utmost confidentiality & strictest standards of

stewardship. I have a long list and good history of satisfied customers to

back my word and give substance to my oath of the best professional services

possible!!

-Best Regards & Eagerly waiting to hear from you,

-Stephen C. Nier, Professional Illustrator & Draftsman