Intellectual Property–Can We Protect It?

No

But the good news is the money seems to be in the first introduction of new technology, sort of the wave principle.

If it gets stolen after that it is usually for severely discounted products the inventor didn't even want to compete with.

So invent it, commercialize it and sell it the rights and move on before the market is flooded with knockoffs.

Is there such a thing? Did Galileo own the moons of Jupiter?

Hi all

• In my experience, the best protection is to keep doing R&D and when someone knocks off your idea, you have a better product ready to launch.
• Generally less intelligent individuals will copy your idea, clever people will improve it.
• If you have the market, then don't blink, remember Lotus 1-2-3, well Excel zapped them.
• If you are first in the market you can be the generic word for the product e.g. Hoover.
• My experience is getting royalties is a nightmare and you need someway of enforcing it, own specialized tooling and machinery or issue a yearly code to reactive machinery when they are paid.
• Its 10 to 100 times harder to licence overseas.

Tony

YES....even though the first "idea" or concept my have evolved from one person, you will find that it takes a team to commercialise it. If the corporation treats its people well and employee turn around is small then there is less chance that a competitor will discover the little things that truly make your invention tick. Combine a well writen patent (meening that you should have included the "Best Methoed"... as well as the least expensive way of manifucturing it) and limit any one person total acsess that is not listed on the parent application, then you will be OK. Don't rush it. Wait until the patent has been issued (you can still tool up durring this time) before you intruduce the "All In" approuch. Most companys try to rush the product into the market to soon and havent spent the time refining there manufacturing methods. Once there product hits the shelf, others find the best methoed (a better way of making your product) which in its own right might be patentible. Dream on with diliberence and patieance.

This is probably my first of many comments to come on this subject (hopefully, the further ones will be better structured) :

In my opinion, in many cases the problem is not that patent IP is expensive but rather, that patent protection is seeked on biased evaluation, false assumptions or improper criterias.

I have met quite a few people who believe that their patent agents will asses the COMMERCIAL value of the patent application on real hard facts. That is generaly not part of their responsability. In many cases, the inventor will be approaching an agent stating that they have discovered something wonderfull and original from which they hope to get an economical return. The patent agents/attorneys, in the course of their work will answer the classic questions pertaining to patent eligibility. Doing so, they will also advise the inventor as to the position of your patent in regards to other patents in the field. They are concerned with your patent and will do whatever is needed in connection with its eventual delivery. An inventor can even be led into the impression that he his, indeed, an even better inventor than others if there are other patents in the field and, his idea can still be presented in an advantageous and original way.

An additional factor is the self congratulating aspect of the patent : You, the Inventor got that patent, then the idea must have been real good. Well, No. The patent is simply a testimony to the fact that you are the first to present an idea as a possible solution to a situation that one can see as being a problem. That does NOT say anything about the economical value of your idea, which is strictly related to the economical advantage you can get from it "period".

Critical stage gating or, more appropriatly put, COMMON SENSE and RIGOR is a great help in evaluation the economical value of a patent idea. Some "free" research into www.freepatentsonline.com is a nice step, and so would be a critical discussion with competent partners knowledgable in the field. Of course, this is rarely done because : 1) The inventor don't want to share the idea before it is protected for fear that it will be improperly dispatched or misappropiated, 2) The inventor don't want to share the inventorship with peers whom he may find will have significantly contributed to the standing idea, once discussions are completed, 3) The inventor may see his idea be straighfully put to the ground on a very basic issue. This will happen as long as patents are perceived as some sort of personnal reward.

The role of a patent is stricly an economical one (yes, the economical advantage may take various shapes). Furthermore, a patent is definitively NOT a testimonial to the economical value of an invention. The patent is there as a complement to support the economical value of an invention that should ALWAYS stand on its own. Additionnaly it should be remembered that the primary role of a patent agent is generally NOT to assess the economical value of a patent (even though I am sure that there are many who will do a basic assessment as a matter of course).

Intellectual property is more strictly enforced then patents.

You see this enforcement at the beginning of any rented movie in the form of an FBI warning.

When with a group of friends and you're just tossing around ideas that you have and next thing you know one of your friends is profitting from one of your ideas, it's pretty hard to do anything about it unless you have someone to collaborate that they stole your idea.

Another factor is that with all patents and copyrights, you have to proactively enforce your entitlements yourself.

Actually IP is protected by patent, copyright and trademark laws.

You must defend your trademark or you will lose it.

The government will enforce your patent rights for 20 years and your copyright rights for 95 years after the death of the author. (If you think that's absurd, thank Disney.)