Thoughts on inventing, patents and marketing

[DDoug]

If you are ready to use staff like that, then it is better to do it with antimelware,

"Mel"...?...

 

[julkor]

I hope I'll be able to invent something revolutionary and helpful someday. Something that could be patented and I'll be known for that. This is such a dream, but who knows maybe I'll have have my great break soon.

 

[Scottl]

I hope I'll be able to invent something revolutionary and helpful someday. Something that could be patented and I'll be known for that. This is such a dream, but who knows maybe I'll have have my great break soon.

Just keep in mind that a patent only gives you the right to sue and if you haven't got the financial resources for a lengthy court battle the infringer wins by default.

There are probably more patents that never even recovered costs of patenting compared to those that made money.

 

[K&T_Journeyman79]

In August 2019, I filed a patent application for an innovative motorcycle accessory. Working with a law firm out of Atlanta, it cost around $8,500. Could have been less if I was capable of producing good 3D models and drawings. It cost another $3,000 to file a PCT and international patent application. The patent review is in-process and I should have final notification in the next six (6) to twelve (12) months. Although tedious, I have started to manufacture a small lot of products for sale. Will need to sell approximately twenty (20) units to recoup my lawyer costs.

 

[AD Design]

Too late to recover expenses so hit the market before anybody else with enough stock on hand to cover orders before "others" do a knock-off. If it has market potential then some of the usual suspects will do a knock-off and undercut you. I've personally seen this happen at small businesses and corporate entities. Be first because few consumers know what makes your product better, most think all things are equal except price. Good luck.

 

[ben_john7]

I think the problem is that today's educational institutions pay very little attention to teaching how to protect their inventions. As a result, the discoveries of young scientists are being used by others.

 

[Quelana]

That is a pretty damn terrible thing that you do not have connections to marketers. I mean, let's be honest marketing is more than just important nowadays, it is basically the most important thing for any kind of business in any domain. If your products or services are not promoted in the right way, you are not going to be able to sell it, and that is the worst thing that might happen to an entrepreneur. Even in the digital area, marketing has reached some insane levels. SEO is only getting more and more important, for any kind of website, and it is the best possible way to "promote" your website. I have been reading a lot of things about seo and website audit checklist recently. Now I understand how important seo is for real.

 

[Mike_F]

I'm new to the forum, but an old hack at patents.
Before taking a patent, I try to answer some questions:
1) Is this something someone can use without your knowledge? It's no good to have a patent that can easily be infringed on.
2) Is it something (i.e. a process) that you can keep secret? I have a good many trade secrets. The patent would simply leak the method.
3) Is it easy to work around? In your patent, you must look for critical aspects and document them in you claims section.
4) How many people are willing to pay for it? If one person is willing to pay to prevent it from being copied, you have it made. It may be ugly but potential customers can take on the competitors in court.
Are you still interested, then do not disclose to nature of the invention to ANYONE who lacks a non-disclosure-agreement.
Then, you'd do well to learn the structure of a modern patent (yes the US has changed regarding this). While individual patents have gotten cheap, there is much work to do searching through similar patents, and patents similar to those, and so forth...
Past that point, there are some boiler plate patents which teach you how to state what you have, and most importantly how to word the claims. At the end, You really should use an attorney to review it. He gets paid by the hour, so decide what aspects you wish addressing Before meeting. I'll give some free advice if your interested.

 

[EmGo]

I'm new to the forum, but an old hack at patents.

Are you the second half of the necrospam tag team ? who gets to be Kinji Shibuya, and who has to be Mr Saito ?

 

[eKretz]

Are you the second half of the necrospam tag team ? who gets to be Kinji Shibuya, and who has to be Mr Saito ?

If so, he is a patient MF'er. Props.

But post history says he's all good. Reported the other clown.

 

[JST]

..........................At the end, You really should use an attorney to review it. He gets paid by the hour, so decide what aspects you wish addressing Before meeting. I'll give some free advice if your interested.

Attorneys are not all-knowing.

I had the "pleasure" of dealing with an attorney at arguably the best patent law firm in the area, for two patents at my employer. One mine, one a co-worker's. The attorney knew the law, BUT he did not know the subject of the patent.

I had to suggest better claims, as well as some other things. He took it well, and agreed, once he understood what was going on.

The takeaway is that nobody knows your patentable item as well as you do. Regard the attorney's ideas as a suggestion, and not the end of the story. Put forth your explanation, and question things. Yes, you are paying, but it can mean the differnce between a lousy patent and a good tight one. If the patented item is good, that can be a large monetary difference.

Just to be fair, I will say that the firm also gave us some of the best advice.... based on knowing the courts.

We had an infringement claim against us. Our attorney (from the firm in question) agreed with us that the infringement claim was bogus, and that there was a prior patent, now expired, which meant that the opposition had themselves infringed, the patent was issued in error, and the company thus had no standing to claim on us. That was our argument, and he said it was a good one.

HOWEVER, he advised us to pay up for royalties anyhow.... The issue was that the court that would hear our case had some characteristics. 1) The court always considered an issued patent to be good, unless you essentially had a textbook which had drawings and explanation exactly covering the case. 2) The court had not thrown out any patents or portions of patents in "X" number of years, and was known for it.

He said we had a good case. But, with that court, and the nature of the case, which involved invalidating part of a patent, it would cost us 2 million dollars to "not" get the patent infringement claim tossed.

We took that advice, especially since the total probable profits from the product would not allow that expense and still provide good ROI. The royalties were much cheaper.

Sometimes a good lawyer is very good to listen to.

Sometimes you have to buck the lawyer to make sure they are on the right track.