Any patent experts here?

[cgallery]

Okay, I was working in the shop a couple of weeks ago and invented a new widget. There are existing widgets on the market, but mine works much better. Most people are happy with their existing widgets, but complain about one aspect of them, and I have solved that problem. My patent searches seem to indicate that nobody else has been granted a patent on this idea.

I got some books on patents and it seems like for about $100 I can get a provisional patent for one year.

Seeing as I don't want to manufacture this product myself but would rather sell it to someone else, does this seem like an intelligent way to go? Do manufacturers you're trying to get interested in a product take a provisional patent seriously?

I'd just as soon avoid spending $2500+ on a patent attorney up front. My grandfather invented the reclining automobile seat (I'm not kidding, this is true). However, the automobile companies at the time ignored the idea until the patent ran out, and then started producing cars with reclining seats. I would like to avoid spending $2500+ and having a similar fate.

[LCHIEN]

Okay, I was working in the shop a couple of weeks ago and invented a new widget. There are existing widgets on the market, but mine works much better. Most people are happy with their existing widgets, but complain about one aspect of them, and I have solved that problem. My patent searches seem to indicate that nobody else has been granted a patent on this idea.

I got some books on patents and it seems like for about $100 I can get a provisional patent for one year.

Seeing as I don't want to manufacture this product myself but would rather sell it to someone else, does this seem like an intelligent way to go? Do manufacturers you're trying to get interested in a product take a provisional patent seriously?

I'd just as soon avoid spending $2500+ on a patent attorney up front. My grandfather invented the reclining automobile seat (I'm not kidding, this is true). However, the automobile companies at the time ignored the idea until the patent ran out, and then started producing cars with reclining seats. I would like to avoid spending $2500+ and having a similar fate.

Some guy patented the air bag system for auto passenger saftery in the 50's. As we know it did not get into use until the 90's long after the patents ran out. Case of technology was not ready - chemicals had to be invented that would expand fast enough and not be in themselves dangerous and cheap decceleration senors and electronics had to be invented. So the idea was ahead of its time. However surely other patents were made on the new technology.

Firstly you must really have a patentable idea which meets certain criteria that you will be expected to prove or at least argue well. A lot of people see a good idea and suggest patent or invention but there is really no grounds for it. Must be new, novel, and non-obvious to people practiced in the art, among other criteria. You must also have thought of it and documented it first. So int he cae of your widget improvement it must be new, novel and non-obvious to a designer or engineer of similar products. It cannot be published or illustrated or sold even if you can't find a patent on it. Non-obviousness is a tough one, if its an obscure problem but a similar solution is used in related or similar processes or equipment, then the most you can get is an application patent covering use only in woodworking say, but not machining metal. Narrow application patents are of course not as desirable or valuable as broad patents.

A provisional patent appl. may be filed to start the date of the patent process (which may take several years but you must follow with an completed official application within a year).

Unless you have specific experience writing patent applications it is a legal document and portions of it claim pvery precisely what you are claiming and if you miss loopholes then your patent will be weak and worthless.

If you do get a patent that is strong and enforcable the next hurdle is making money with it. You can A) sell the patent B) License the patent for upfront money plus royalties C) go into manufacturing yourself
You must be prepared to sell it and make presentations. Many companies will not listen to you because of fears that they are working on similar stuff or simliar problems and if their solution is similar don't want you to sue them that they stole your idea.
Some companies will steal an idea because they don't think you have the financial power or staying power to fight infringement in court. If you want to go into the manufacturing business it takes a lot of work and requires defense of the patent against infringers.

I think the patent application and annual maintenance fees are getting quite expensive not even counting the lawyer fees. Patents in other countries could add expense greatly.

Wikioedia on provisional patent applications:
One popular use of a provisional application is to document and "lock in" potential patent rights while attempting to obtain sponsors for further development (and for more expensive patent applications). This tactic may permit an inventor to defer major patent application costs until the commercial viability (or futility) of the invention becomes apparent. However, wise investors consider provisional applications in view of the long road to potential patentability, not to mention the limitations that may be defined by the prior art.
They do suggest that the provisional patent must be very specific and limits what you can ultimately patent to what you initially claim.

[LinuxRandal]

My understanding is a provisional patent, is only protection from others filing after you've come up with an idea. However, big companies always have time to wait, as you've seen with the reclining car seats, TV (Phillo T Farnsworth), and others (not to start a debate here, but if the Sawstop lawyer didn't push for mandated safety features, when the time ran out, my odds are on manufacturers coming out with that, "for your safety").

[Stytooner]

I would think many ideas or designs really aren't patentable or at least not that profitable once the patent fees are totalled out. It could be a very simple design with a broad use that would be best patented. It could be highly specialized and complicated design for a niche use. There are many aspects that continue to tip the scale one way or the other when deciding on whether to patent or not.
I personally think the best money spent on getting a patent is the money that goes to the Attorney. They ae in the business. They know the in's and out's and can tell you in short order if your design has possibilities. They may, in some cases, have contacts in the manufacturing world as well.
The old saying, "It takes money to make money" is all to prevelent still today. I would at least consider discussing the design with a patent attorney. Document it first, of course.

In the case of the Shark Guard, I may or may not have had a patentable idea. Had I initially spent the money on the original design for a patent, it would have been lost. The design today has changed no less than 8 times. Each time an improvement. Would I have had to file a patent for every design change? I think so.
Since the Shark is really simple safety, I decided to make it open source, rather than try to get rich off the idea. Not saying getting rich wouldn't be nice, but it has at least allowed me to quit punching a clock and work at home. That to me is a step in the right direction.

[jseklund]

I am NOT a patent expert, so I almost didn't respond to this thread. However, am a student of business, and I have noticed this interesting thing about "patents". Whenever someone has an idea, they think "I need to patent this". It's almost like, "I'm smart, I'm going to get a patent." in a lot of people (not saying this is what YOU are saying, just the general public).

As stated before, you have to have a unique idea, that hasn't been thought of before, that isn't public knowledge/obvious to get a patent (in simple terms). It also costs a lot of $$ and there is a process involved. You will also want to file patents AROUND your patent, most likely, to protect the ideas of things similar to yours. In the end, the process of patenting reveals not only the problem you are solving it, but EXACTLY how you are solving it. Beyond this, more legal battles can ensue when someone breaks your patent. A patent only protects you if you have the $$ to enforce it. If Delta just says, "Sell it. It will make us $1B and the legal fees will cost us 30M." - Do you have $30M to protect it? (Granted, with big numbers you may get contingent representation, but ....you may not)

I am always reminded of this- Coca-Cola does not own a patent on their formula. KFC does not own a patent on their fried chicken recipe. Sure you can reverse-engineer it and know that it contains carbonated water, caramel coloring, sodium chloride, fructose, etc.- but how did they put it together? It's the process that is important, and the secrecy is around that process. So if I want to compete with the same product, I just don't know for sure HOW it is made....

Just my .02. As usual, it may be worth about that

[cgallery]

Thanks all, good input.

I'm probably going to join the ranks of inventors that get walked all over.

The way I understand it, once I've filed my provisional patent application I can reveal my invention. Perhaps once you guys see what I've done you can tell me whether I have something or not, and then I'll decide whether to persue it. Kinda backwards, but I guess it is the system we have.

:-)

[BigguyZ]

You can always do the poor man's patent- mailing yourself the idea via certified mail. Then you can prove prior invention, or whatever the term is. Maybe I'm mistaken here, but if you can prove you came up with it before- you can have the rights to the patent even if someone goes through the formal process later.

[LCHIEN]

I would think many ideas or designs really aren't patentable or at least not that profitable once the patent fees are totalled out. It could be a very simple design with a broad use that would be best patented. It could be highly specialized and complicated design for a niche use. There are many aspects that continue to tip the scale one way or the other when deciding on whether to patent or not.
I personally think the best money spent on getting a patent is the money that goes to the Attorney. They ae in the business. They know the in's and out's and can tell you in short order if your design has possibilities. They may, in some cases, have contacts in the manufacturing world as well.
The old saying, "It takes money to make money" is all to prevelent still today. I would at least consider discussing the design with a patent attorney. Document it first, of course.

In the case of the Shark Guard, I may or may not have had a patentable idea. Had I initially spent the money on the original design for a patent, it would have been lost. The design today has changed no less than 8 times. Each time an improvement. Would I have had to file a patent for every design change? I think so.
Since the Shark is really simple safety, I decided to make it open source, rather than try to get rich off the idea. Not saying getting rich wouldn't be nice, but it has at least allowed me to quit punching a clock and work at home. That to me is a step in the right direction.

I remember there were a few calls for you to patent the shark guard but of course by then it was too late, Once a product is offered for sale or becomes public then you have lost patent rights. However at the time I did analyze it and came to the conclusion that even had you wished before making public, there were no totally novel elements, just a nice combination of many known elements in an elegant and usable/user friendly package. At the very most you would have gotten a very narrow use patent on the specific combination(s) of features for a table saw guard. As of now you have no real competition or copiers so it seems a patent would have done little good anyway. I suppose had a company making table saws come up with a design incorporating such features, then some royalties might have been forthcoming, OTOH, it might have disuaded said company from using those features, too. But On the third hand, a patent may have made the sharkguard combination wider public knowledge... I'm sure many TS designers have never seen it.

But a great device - you have done many BTers a service, Lee.

[LarryG]

This probably amounts to picking on semantics, but my understanding is that you cannot patent an idea -- it has to be a physical item (or perhaps just detailed documentation, I'm not sure) that is the embodiment of the idea and demonstrates how it is different from anything that has gone before it.

cgallery, I have a close friend who used to research and write patent applications for a multi-national corporation. He's now moved on the other work but he spent enough years doing it that he would certainly know the basic (and not so basic) steps involved, and perhaps have some insights on how to protect your interests. I'd be glad to put the two of you together, if you like ... just send me a PM.

[Stytooner]

Thanks, Loring.
I agree. It probably wasn't even patentable. I feel certain that I made the right decision. It was designed by and has evolved from input of people that actually use the end product. The path I chose was the most expedient to get these where they were most needed. On tablesaws.

I don't mind working for a living. I have done it all my life. It was a life choice I knowingly made. Doing something that I like to do is a plus. My greatest satisfaction though is in knowing that I am helping guys and gals work safer.
Ulimately, I hope a manufacturer is able to produce something that is at least as easy to use. In today's day and age of technology, it's astonishing that better safety hasn't been implemented already. I see it coming now, but there has been a lot of water under the bridge since the standard blade guard was designed. It was a stop gap measure at best and was rarely even used.

I would love to see your widgit after you document it. I think you have a year from first being public or from first sale to file for a patent.

[Tom Miller]

Something that has not yet been mentioned:

Getting a patent has become nearly trivial, at least in the US. The bar for patentability has been lowered at the initial gate, with the assumption that patent rights will be more exactly decided in litigation.

Furthermore, by filing a provisional patent (or publishing in any way), you may end up spoiling your future manufacturing partner's approach to better protecting the IP.

I'm not sure what your best approach might be, but my guess is you'll have to decide how committed you are to this, and shell out the $$ accordingly (to get the right advice for starters).

But, you can tell us your idea. I promise it won't go beyond this forum.

Regards,
Tom

[LCHIEN]

[quote=LarryG]This probably amounts to picking on semantics, but my understanding is that you cannot patent an idea -- it has to be a physical item (or perhaps just detailed documentation, I'm not sure) that is the embodiment of the idea and demonstrates how it is different from anything that has gone before it.

...
quote]

I think the days of patenting phyiscal models is long gone.
Nowadays you patent the idea and particularly enumerate the claims defining the possible embodiment(s) of the idea you wish to patent.

[LarryG]

Nowadays you patent the idea and particularly enumerate the claims defining the possible embodiment(s) of the idea you wish to patent.

I think that's right ... I have spent a fair amount of time studying Leo Fender's patent drawings for electric guitars, and I think those may have been submitted only in drawing form, and that was back in the 1950s.

What I perhaps should have written was, you cannot patent a mere idea, a raw idea. You have to, as you say, particularly enumerate how your invention differs from what's already out there (if anything is indeed out there; usually, it seems like there's nothing truly new under the sun).

[LCHIEN]

You can not patent an on a broad and non-specific idea like a car that runs on bullsh*t.
However, based on a somewhat more but not significant amount of embellishment and loophole closing, I think you could actually get a patent on this specific plan:

Bullshi*t powered conveyance

Place a microphone in a sports bar or similar location filled with men. Use the microphone and an amplifier (well known in the electronics art) to charge a secondary battery cell (also well known in the electrical/electronics art). Charging may consist of a rectifying the amplifier output and applying the resulting DC voltage to the secondary cell using a current limiting resistor. Rectifiers may consist of solid state devices such as a 1N4005 as made by Diodes Inc. Charge rates may be controlled manually or automaticaly by varying the reistance or amplification, and by stimulating conversation among the men with sufficient quantities of social lubricant (beer, such as made by Coors, Inc. of Golden Colorado).

The secondary cells may be charged in place or removable. If removable they must be installed in the conveyance (vehicle) to be of use, after charging.

Sufficiently-charged cells are placed in a usable location, if not charged-in-place, such location being part of a electric-motor powered vehicle. Such a vheicle could be silimar in concept to electric carts commonly used to navigate gol courses, in common use. The batteries then connected to said motor in said vehicle may propel the vehicle under manual or automatic control, some distance, said distance being dependent upon the battery cell size and amount of bullsh*t converted.

I think this would be patentable in a very narrow patent and any of you are welcome to file for the patent if you wish.

[JR]

I have a friend who came up with a bright idea and got it patented. His approach was different than I've seen mentioned, so I'll tell a little about it.

He got hooked up with a local Inventors' Club. This is a group of people, of varied backgrounds, who share the cleverness gene. They meet monthly. At their meetings they assist one another, under non-disclosure agreement, with the development of patentable ideas.

They're hooked up with, or have members who are, patent attornies, marketing experts, experienced inventors, and so on. A few new ideas are presented by the inventors at each club meeting. Feedback from the group identifies strengths and weaknesses of the idea, possible marketing ideas, etc.

Their captive attorney facilitates the preliminary patent application, with help from other club members, as needed, to clean up the documentation.

The group actually did field marketing to validate/refute their own reactions to the product. A presentation was developed, to be used in interviews of people in the field in question.

From all of this a business plan could be developed. This plan, developed by the idea man or at extra cost by a club member, could be used in securing funding for tooling and mfg. of prototypes, as well as presentation to potential marketing partners.

The whole thing was very well developed, with modest cost in the beginning and good protection for the idea , costs escalating as the project developed. The network of lawyers, business consutants and potential marketing partners was very valuable.

My friend's idea, now patented, was for a skateboard accessory system, providing a platform for lights, cameras, or other accessories to be attached under the board. http://www.underwaretechnology.com/ He's not a skateboarder, not athletic, just a guy with an idea.

Now, listening him tell stories about the 50-year-old man going into board shops smelling of burning rope and trying to sell Landing Lights is a riot!

JR