Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Patents ? — Parallax Forums

Patents ?

Zap-oZap-o Posts: 452
edited 2011-03-24 14:33 in General Discussion
Is a patent difficult / costly and can I use the propeller in this grand design of mine?

Anyone ever get a patent if so please chime in so that I can have a path to go on.
«1

Comments

  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2011-03-22 19:21
    Here are some things to consider:

    1. Can you afford the attorney fees to get the patent?

    2. Can you afford the attorney fees to sue infringers? (The government won't do that for you.)

    Might it be better just to make your device, sell it while you can before the pirates catch on, then move on to something else?

    -Phil
  • edited 2011-03-22 21:57
    In reality, patents are only worth it if you have a product and people are beating a path to your door. If you only can sell 200 units then is a patent worth it?

    I found it interesting that Microsoft was suing Barnes and Noble and the blogs were claiming that because Microsoft has something like 20,000 patents they can sue and the alleged accusation was that Microsoft was trying to get Barnes and Noble to license one of their patents. This might be evidence that the patent system is broken.
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2011-03-23 01:30
    Chuckz,
    This might be evidence that the patent system is broken.

    When James Watt wanted to adapt his steam engines from linear motion drive for pumps to rotary motion for driving machines in factories the obvious thing to do was to make a crankshaft. Well what do you know, he could not, someone had a patent on it. So he had to build a more complicated and expensive system to convert linear to rotary motion, the sun and planet gears.

    Even in a history of steam power written a hundred years ago the author was stating that patents had held up the course of development my decades.

    I conclude that the patent system has always been broken.
  • william chanwilliam chan Posts: 1,326
    edited 2011-03-23 02:09
    Heater. wrote: »
    When James Watt wanted to adapt his steam engines from linear motion drive for pumps to rotary motion for driving machines in factories the obvious thing to do was to make a crankshaft. Well what do you know, he could not, someone had a patent on it. So he had to build a more complicated and expensive system to convert linear to rotary motion, the sun and planet gears.

    Why didn't he license the crankshaft from the patent holder?
  • wjsteelewjsteele Posts: 697
    edited 2011-03-23 02:47
    Patents "ARE" an exclusive right granted to inventors by the US Constitution for the benefit of the inventor. The system isn't broken if someone defends their Constitutional rights... it's actually working! Other people might think that it stifles innovation, but think of it this way... those 20 years of exclusivity IS the reason people pursue an invention in a lot of cases. Otherwise, why invest years (5 in my case) towards perfecting an idea without a reward? If they didn't pursue it, that new product would never have been invented... and that is much worse than just delaying the invention.

    Now, with that said, if you feel that your product is a worthy product and can prove it is new and useful, then you can file a patent. However, be very aware the only value of them is in defending yourself in court against copy cats, and sometimes that doesn't even work out in your favor.

    The very first question you have to ask youself truly is not if it is a unique invention, but are you ready to defend it all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary? If not, then filing a patent isn't going to get you anything but your name in the historical archives in Washington.

    And yes, I do have patents pending.

    Bill
  • Zap-oZap-o Posts: 452
    edited 2011-03-23 07:13
    Well I believe I have a gold mine of an idea and want to sell it to FORD or other motor companies.

    I have $5,000 saved up for seed money and another $5,000 in a few months, so if its going to cost more to obtain a patent then I may be screwed.

    Any ideas on if this can be done with out an attorney?

    wjsteele - I think its a truly original, simple and yet could change the several industries forever. Problem is, I am not 100%. I am merely 99% so Ill need to find a way to search patents.
  • BeanBean Posts: 8,129
    edited 2011-03-23 07:26
    I agree that "in theory" the patent system is a good thing. But when patents are issued for such common things as using PWM to control the color of a RGB LED, then the system is broken.
    That patent has been upheld in court. Utterly riduculous...

    Also a big company can sue you for patent infringment even if you are not, they can keep you tied up in court and cost you thousands defending yourself.

    Bean
  • Invent-O-DocInvent-O-Doc Posts: 768
    edited 2011-03-23 07:33
    I work with scientists and engineers who patent things frequently, though I never have done so myself. My understanding is that the legal process to get a patent and see the whole process through is about $10,000 (but it can be done more cheaply).

    I think one thing that is stifling innovation is the software patent and design patents in software: for example, someone patented green arrows over streets in a game to indicate a desired path. There is a whole industry of patent trolls out there that get patents for ridiculous things and lie in wait for someone to sue. Either Australia or New Zealand outlawed software patents recently but retained copyright protections.
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,260
    edited 2011-03-23 08:39
    $10K is a typical minimum for a utility patent (US only) for a simple device. Patent agents (usually engineers) cost less than patent attorneys, and will give you an estimate and a free consultation. DOUBLE whatever they estimate.

    As Phil said, that's just the start of the costs. It's up to you to police and prosecute would-be infringers.

    Provisional patents cost less and offer less protection than full utility patents.

    When you see "Patent Pending" molded/stamped onto a product, it most likely means they're bluffing and haven't done anything.
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2011-03-23 08:46
    Zap-o,

    Before spending your bankroll on a patent and approaching the auto companies, be sure to rent and watch the movie Flash of Genius.

    -Phil
  • localrogerlocalroger Posts: 3,452
    edited 2011-03-23 11:10
    It is possible to do most of the work to get a patent yourself and do it fairly cheaply. The absolute must-have resource if you want to try (and you should read it anyway before deciding whether to try) is this book: http://www.nolo.com/products/patent-it-yourself-PAT.html

    nolo.com also has a little online FAQ about whether you should attempt a patent: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/checklist-should-you-patent-invention-29456.html

    You should also bear in mind that having a patent doesn't get you enforcement; there aren't any patent police you can call to report infringement. You have to find infringers yourself and sue them; what the patent gives you is the right to sue for and collect damages. That's all it is. If you don't think you would have the means to do that the patent won't be any good to you even if you are awarded it.
  • Zap-oZap-o Posts: 452
    edited 2011-03-23 12:10
    Boy this is discouraging news. I am on the fence now, dont know what to do. I mean if you fellas had a great idea would you try to patent it?

    Anyhow thanks for the help people I seriously need to do some soul searching on this one.
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2011-03-23 12:25
    Zap-o wrote:
    I mean if you fellas had a great idea would you try to patent it?
    For me, the answer is easy: no.

    -Phil
  • Dave HeinDave Hein Posts: 6,347
    edited 2011-03-23 12:26
    erco wrote: »
    Provisional patents cost less and offer less protection than full utility patents.
    I think you are referring to a provisional application. A provisional application is filed with the Patent office to establish a filing date. You would then have a year to decide if you actually want to file for a patent. The provisional application cost less than filing for a patent, and it takes less work to prepare it. It doesn't really provide any protection against infringement until a patent is filed and approved by the Patent departement. With the current backlog that could take five or six years.

    Dave
  • Duane DegnDuane Degn Posts: 10,588
    edited 2011-03-23 13:38
    @Bill,

    Patents are not "for the benefit of the inventor." They are "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts."

    Duane
  • Mike GMike G Posts: 2,702
    edited 2011-03-23 16:20
    What if an entity from another country copies and produces the product? I went down the patent path one time, it's expensive.

    I strongly agree with Phil, get the product to market and reap the benefits before someone copies the idea.
  • Clock LoopClock Loop Posts: 2,069
    edited 2011-03-23 16:27
    Zap-o wrote: »
    Boy this is discouraging news. I am on the fence now, dont know what to do. I mean if you fellas had a great idea would you try to patent it?

    If you don't have the investment money to back up all the lawyers and in-fighting over your patent, you'd be better off releasing it under a creative commons license or some sort, and encouraging people to use your idea.

    Most likely you will find that a very small amount of people will be interested, and most them will be tinkerers.

    IF its something truly groundbreaking, spread it far and wide under cc before a company can steal it from you.

    The biggest mistake any inventor makes when having a moment of invention zen, is hide it away till it gets patented, the truly life changing inventions never see the light of day, the original inventor gets killed or made into a crack pot, or gets sued out of owning their own invention.

    One of the amazing things about inventing something amazing, or a great idea, is that the inventor spread the idea far and wide, and was not really interested in monetary gain. (at least when they are so poor that they can't patent something at first)

    So they get it released and printed far and wide to acquire persona recognition. If you can't patent something, try to make it work for you in the creative commons space, via social recognition.

    Set up a plan to release the invention far and wide under CC, if you think it will make waves. Then ride off the wave to gain social recognition.

    If that works, you might find investors interested in you and your idea(s).
    Then you use that investment money to make other ideas/inventions/patents.


    Never let the Greed of inventing, stop you from inventing.

    Always
    Keep
    Moving.

    Instead of worrying about making money on it, worry about making it better, and making your old version obsolete.

    They key to inventing is: give all but one of your inventions away free to mankind.
    Keep the last big one for your self when you can afford to defend it.
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    edited 2011-03-23 16:48
    Duane Degn wrote: »
    @Bill,

    Patents are not "for the benefit of the inventor." They are "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts."

    Duane

    Patents originated with the intention of promoting the progress of science and the useful arts by rewarding the inventor with exclusive rights to that invention for a period of time. The idea was to avoid having information and ideas vanish with the death of the inventor. What the system does now is line the pockets of lawyers, patent trolls, and corporations.

    Makes me think the old joke " What is 200 lawyers at the bottom of a lake? A good start!" is apropos.
  • Bill ChennaultBill Chennault Posts: 1,198
    edited 2011-03-23 16:49
    erco and All--
    When you see "Patent Pending" molded/stamped onto a product, it most likely means they're bluffing and haven't done anything.
    "Patent Pending" cannot be legally displayed unless the U.S. Patent Office has acknowledged receipt of the relevant patent filing. "Patent Pending" is often used as protection (if one has the money to pursue it) for "inventions" that one knows will never be approved by the U.S. Patent Office.

    Most of the information in this thread is accurate. My experience is that patents always cost more than initially quoted; big companies often ignore the patents assigned to small companies or individuals because it costs a LOT of money to prosecute patent infringement claims in court; and it always takes a long time to prosecute patent infringment in U.S. courts.

    Are patents "worth it?" The advice given in this thread, both pro and con, is relevant.

    --Bill
  • Beau SchwabeBeau Schwabe Posts: 6,568
    edited 2011-03-23 16:57
    It's possible to go the other direction .... keep lots of notes, and create as much of a personal paper trail as you can. Find a creditable legal notary from a law firm that can acknowledge your idea.

    This doesn't get you a patent, but does provide solid evidence of when your idea was first conceived and you might have some legal leverage that way depending on how your documents were filed and notarized.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acknowledgment_(law)
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2011-03-23 17:09
    The U.S. is on a fast track, it seems, to switch to a "first-to-file" from its current "first-to-invent" patent system. I'm not sure what this will mean for the concept of "prior art" or for a portfolio of notarized design documents. It does seem to bode ill for small-time inventors, though.

    -Phil
  • localrogerlocalroger Posts: 3,452
    edited 2011-03-23 17:22
    Zap-o, if you believe this strongly in your idea then I very strongly encourage you to spend the money on a copy of the most recent edition of Patent It Yourself. The first few chapters are very much about whether you should go for a patent, what you will get if you are awarded your patent, the difference between patent, trademark, and copyright, and various methods (other than DIY) of seeking a patent with comparisons. It's a very comprehensive source and even though it is expensive, worth every penny even if all you take from it is the advice not to bother or how to pick a patent attorney.
  • wjsteelewjsteele Posts: 697
    edited 2011-03-23 18:25
    Zap-o wrote: »
    Boy this is discouraging news. I am on the fence now, dont know what to do. I mean if you fellas had a great idea would you try to patent it?

    There is no reason why you can't use that money to develop the idea and present it to Ford/GM/Whomever under a non-disclosure agreement instead.
  • wjsteelewjsteele Posts: 697
    edited 2011-03-23 18:29
    Duane Degn wrote: »
    Patents are not "for the benefit of the inventor." They are "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts."

    Oh... be careful there... taking only part of the sentence changes the whole meaning. The entire sentence is "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;"

    Which means exactly what I said. It promotes science by allowing the individual inventor a period of time (that is not indefinite) to the exclusive rights, so that the public, as a whole, can benefit once that time period elapses. If the person takes the idea to the grave with them, then society doesn't benefit at all.

    Bill
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2011-03-23 19:00
    I'd be very surprised if a big company like Ford would sign an NDA with an individual inventor. They'd have nothing to gain and everything to lose by doing so. Heck, I don't even sign NDAs anymore. If it's a requirement for a contract, I automatically turn down the contract.

    -Phil
  • Duane DegnDuane Degn Posts: 10,588
    edited 2011-03-23 19:56
    @Bill,

    I confess. I looked it up in Wikipedia and the part I quoted was the quote at the top of the page. I did not read further to find the rest of the clause.

    I wanted to stress that patents should be for the good of society in general.

    I think you explained it well in your last post.

    Duane
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2011-03-23 23:55
    william chan
    Why didn't he [James Watt] license the crankshaft from the patent holder?

    I believe that it was possible for Watt to make a cross-licensing deal with regard the crankshaft patent but I can think of a few reasons why he did not want to:

    1) Being a clever guy he could not stomach exchanging his "clever" idea about steam condensers, developed over a number of years, with the mind bendingly "obvious" idea of the crankshaft that took no effort on the part of the patent holder.

    2) Being a clever guy he determined he could think his way around the problem. Which he did by using the sun and planet gear idea instead.

    3) Perhaps he decided the value of the patent offered for licensing was not worth the cost.

    4) Perhaps it was a simple case of the "not invented here" syndrome.

    I don't really know, I just have a feeling that 1) is likely.
  • HumanoidoHumanoido Posts: 5,770
    edited 2011-03-24 00:05
    If you obtain a patent, the world will have access your exact plans and can build the product. You can sue the ones in your country if you have lots of unlimited cash like Microsoft. But what happens when your product pours in from China or Mexico? If you contact a big company like IBM, the first thing they do is give you papers to sign handing over your designs to relinquish your rights. In some cases it's better to make the product without a patent, get in and saturate the market, then get out of the market and move on. There's roughly a two year life cycle.
  • Zap-oZap-o Posts: 452
    edited 2011-03-24 05:50
    I'd be very surprised if a big company like Ford would sign an NDA with an individual inventor. They'd have nothing to gain and everything to lose by doing so. Heck, I don't even sign NDAs anymore. If it's a requirement for a contract, I automatically turn down the contract.

    -Phil

    Phil I am always doing engineering work and It seems that there is always a NDA. Why don't you sign them, whats the pros and cons of a NDA? I figured if I refused to sign the NDA I would never have work.
  • wjsteelewjsteele Posts: 697
    edited 2011-03-24 06:45
    I'd be very surprised if a big company like Ford would sign an NDA with an individual inventor.

    Actually, Phil, they do it all the time. I've had several discussions with the big three about various technologies that were not patented. Attorneys are very good at finding a middle ground that works for both sides.

    Bill
Sign In or Register to comment.