Who Owns the Idea?

Are individual inventors losing grip on their intellectual property?

Never realized they ever had a grip.......you get a few here and there that was in the right place at the right time...say for instance the one that invented the weed eater.

But I do believe they never had a grip.

phoenix911

Ideas cannot be 'owned'.

"The moment an idea is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me."

Thomas Jefferson

I believe the author is talking about earning a living versus someone else profiting from our endeavors.

it was in my contract when i worked for Phillips, everything that i invented during work-time would be owned by Phillips

Not at all uncommon. And people sign those contracts. We want the job. There is reason to establish this in that during the course of your work you are exposed to many things that you would not have otherwise been likely to be exposed to, and on the company's dime. If it were not this way, then there would likely be a court battle to determine ownership and assuming that you aren't wealthy guess who will likely win. How likely is it you never thought about it on company time. So if you have an idea quit and go develop it on your own dime. Then there's no problem, maybe. We have to decide what we want to do, work for someone else or work for ourselves. If you don't like the contract then don't sign it. Or attempt to negotiate a different one. But if you give your word in exchange for gainful employ then what part of this arrangement isn't clear. We can't have our cake and eat it too.

thats true....and if you did come out with a profitable idea, they list you as the inventor, and maybe pay you a gratuity of $1.00 to eliminate any posible legal issues.

First-to-file would be OK if that was what the system delivered - but it doesn't.

Under the First-to-file system in use by PCT and WIPO, if you are not able to progress your application within a maximum time of 30 months then you lose that application, and unless you have cancelled it beforehand, then it WILL be published and all the world will get the fruits of your labor for free.

That is what kills the private inventor more than any other factor.

The system promises you 20 years if you are First-to-file but the multinational corporations didn't like that so they found a way to take it from you after 30 months.

That is interesting.

Could you explain a bit more in detail what is meant by: "... not able to progress your application ...".

How and by what rules or laws can an invention be taken away from you after 30 month?

Thanks in advance.

This sounds as if the Congress is simply bringing the US into line with the Rest of the World, at least in terms of patent "stick in the ground" (marker date).

If an individual has invented something prior to the filing date of a multinational's application, then they can still challenge that application and prevent the multinational getting the patent rights. Of course, since the invention is now in the public domain, I believe this means that the inventor can no longer apply for patent rights either.

As stated elsewhere in this thread, it doesn't much affect employees, as their rights are signed over under their employment contracts in most cases. You still get your name on the patent though, so there is kudos, just no dosh!

Do we really want to be in line with the rest of the world? What happened to American leadership in technology and in manufacturing? Sadly, slipping away. But it can be turned around!

Since the leaders of the last 8 years are out, perhaps there is a change.

I know that looks as it is a bit besides the point, but making wars and annoying (understatement) a good part of the world does not help in reputation.

What would you suggest could be done to "turn it around".

The US used to be the best place for innovators and individual inventors. I still prefer the "first to invent" status rather than the "first to apply". To me, "first to apply" is a cop out by the politicians to avoid digging into who the real inventor is and 'again', to favor big business.

Furthermore, if one (or a company) receives a patent for some product, device etc, how is one (or a company) to police the use of the idea or device? It may cost more than $ 1,000,000 to begin the patent infringement suit against another party.

I really don't know enough about this particular situation to comment either way. However, if congress is working on changing it, it must.... well, may I quote an old southern gentleman from many years back who said; "Politicians are like boll weevils, it aint so much what they gets into and carries off, it's what they gets into and messes up."