how to patent a good product

[Spoon]

guys i have some great ideas and modifications that i would like to patent but it looks so discouraging to go through the process. i was looking at the us patents website and it has too much info for the average lay person. how exactly do these things work?

can a unique innovation of an existing product be patented?

 

[hdtran]

guys i have some great ideas and modifications that i would like to patent but it looks so discouraging to go through the process. i was looking at the us patents website and it has too much info for the average lay person. how exactly do these things work?

can a unique innovation of an existing product be patented?

(a) I'm not a lawyer
(b) I'm not a registered patent agent
(c) That said, I do have some experience with the process.

It is generally recommended that you use an attorney or agency that specializes in patents. But buyer beware, many of them are, unfortunately, fly-by-night hacks. If you use an attorney, your total cash outlay (depending on how complicated, etc.) will typically run $10K-$25K (including fees to the patent office) (as af ~2003)

In general, the process runs as follows (not necessarily in this exact sequence):

(1) You perform a patent literature search & general literature search to make sure you haven't re-invented the wheel. Be sure to read the claims, as these are what define the existing intellectual property.
(2) You may (should) draft/file a preliminary filing, which gives you approx. 1 year to draft and submit the full patent application. It is possible to do this without the aid of an attorney/patent agent, but again...
(3) You work on your application and submit.
(4) Your application is in a black hole at USPTO
(5) USPTO may accept, reject, or make comments
(6) If reject or comments, you may choose to iterate 3-5 again.

You have to pay fees to USPTO with the preliminary filing and the application. You will pay the attorney/registered agent as their time is used. You will pay a professional drafter to make nifty illustrations (that's one of the USPTO hangups, they really like their illustrations the way you see them).

There are some games with resubmission that some companies play.

Yes, it is possible to patent a modification on an existing equipment/invention. One of the rules is roughly "not obvious to a skilled practitioner." This is first determined by the USPTO, and may later be litigated when you try to collect your royalties. As an example (I kid you not), Company A has a patent on putting a hole in a windscreen so that you can put a cable through the windscreen enclosure to connect electrical equipment inside. Company B chose not to litigate, though from my viewpoint, this is such an obvious idea that the USPTO should have rejected that particular claim! Company B's procedure is to leave the windscreen door ajar, and duct-tape the cable!

I notice you're in the Phillipines. Maybe you'd have better luck with a Phillipine patent? They probably have nowhere near the number of attorneys as in the US (thank goodness!)

Edit added: It is possible in the US to file completely without the use of attorneys or registered patent agents, but not really recommended. If you want to see how that goes, check out the recent columns in IEEE Spectrum magazine (may be available online for non-members of IEEE, but I'm not sure).

 

[Green_Manelishi]

Stay away from anyone, or group, that guarantees you'll receive a patent. Especially when they ask for money up front.

You can do it yourself but the downside, even if you correctly format the application, etc. can be one of the following:

1) no patent because it did not describe anything unique or patentable

2) no patent because it described something already patented

3) a patent so narrowly defined that it can be improved, by someone else, without infringement on your patent. For example, I modified a DUI weigh and trim harness but their patent is well written so there is little possibility of my claiming an improvement that I can patent. What I did is talk to DUI, talk to my lawyer, provide documentation, etc. so if they use my ideas .... nothing will ever come of it ;-)

4) a patent on an item that is not what you intended to patent

I recommend consulting a lawyer familiar with the process. Right up front you should be told whether or not you are wasting your time. A reputable attorney will not "take the case" simply to make money. You can do some of the preliminary research on-line. The more you do up front the less work the lawyer has to do.

PM me if you are interested in more detail re: my experience.

 

[riguerin]

Spoon,

I am named on a few US Patents in the area logic design and circuits. These were all written, submitted, and successfully litigated through in-house council who specialized in the area of patent law. While you could certainly attempt the process yourself, without prior experience your actual chances of obtaining a patent would likely be very low.

One of the biggest values that a good patent attorney adds is their ability to research the patent data base and determine a very exact wording used in the application such that is it broad enough to be an effective patent, yet narrow enough to distinguish itself from prior art .. thus improving the chances of approval. In particular the wording of "claims" section is vital to successfully obtaining a patent. These get "weasel worded" in such a way, that I can barley understand what some of my inventions really are Another huge value an attorney adds is their litigation experience. Nearly all patent applications are automically rejected initially. What ensues is a litigation process that takes on average 2-3 years or more. From experience, once it has reached this stage there is an excellent chance of the application becoming approved ... if you have a good attorney.

If you think you have a good idea, I would highly recommend talking to someone with experience in this area. Make sure you have everything documented ahead of time.

Here's copy of litmus test that we use for the appliction process :

- Novelty : it has not already been ‘taught’ to the public in another patent, patent application, publication, public use, etc.

- Utility : it solves a tangible problem in a way that would be recognized by someone of ordinary skill in the art

- Non-obviousness : it’s not a predicted, suggested, or expected extension or combination of the prior art

• Inventor should not make this determination, just inform committee by listing closest known art.

• Also, the committee does not make this determination, it is established by the Patent Office. The committee may merely use the known art to get a sense of how different it is from the current invention.​

Finally, if you'd like to get an idea of the final wording of some issued patents, here's a copy of two of my more recent ones.

Memory Access Control - US 6,973,550
Command Ordering - US 6,738,831


Feel free to PM if you have any more questions about the process. Good luck.

 

[jepuskar]

Email me with all of your ideas, diagrams, specifications, etc...i need everything and I'll 'LOOK" into it for you!

 

[Charlie99]

One other thing to look at is to make sure that your patent has value. To be commercially useful, in addition to writing the claims in a way that meet the requirements for having a patent issued, the claims also have to be such that it is difficult for someone to make a device without infringing.

In simpler terms, you not only have to patent your idea, but also all of the reasonable "work-arounds". Writing the claims so that they cover possible work-arounds was the most difficult part in the preparation of the 16 patents I've been issued; and inability to lock out competition was the reason for not bothering to file several others.

 

[PaulChristenson]

guys i have some great ideas and modifications that i would like to patent but it looks so discouraging to go through the process. i was looking at the us patents website and it has too much info for the average lay person. how exactly do these things work?

can a unique innovation of an existing product be patented?

Money-wise you would be better to approach the company whose product that you have improvements for and try to cut a deal with them...

The classic story in Patent law is Eli Whitney and the Cotton Gin...He never really made a penny on it, because he was always fighting in court (i.e. spending money)with everyone who was copying his invention...and the sad part was everytime he went into court and had to show his invention there were several people who then made a copies of his Gin...

He made his money when he went on to develop interchangeable parts for firearms...

So Eli Whitney could be said to have been a major cause of the Civil War, because he provided the mechanism to make slavery profitable for the South and then provided the North the mechanism to fight the Civil War...

 

[cool_hardware52]

Nolo press "Patent it yourself" Google Nolo press.

The $20 is well spent. Read the book, lots of good info about intellectual property rights.

It is worth remembering a few things:

A patentable idea must be novel. Novel doesn't mean "never patented before" Novel means Never done before If some one can show that your idea existed prior to your patent (prior art) a patent you were granted, and paid the costs to obtain can be ruled invalid, in part or in whole.

Most patented ideas are never even produced, many that are produced aren't commercial successes. The idea that once you have a patent in hand the world will beat a path to your door with cash is overly optomistic.

Product development is very expensive, time consuming, even frustrating. The main reason I rattle around in a 8000 sqft machine shop with 9 CNC machines, $40K in Cad Cam soft ware and 30 + major manual machines is so I can do my own Product development. It can be almost impossible to get others to do "one off" prototypes, particularly if the design involves multiple disciplines, for example machining + injection molding + metal fabrication.

I hold patents, but very seldom even consider bothering with them these days. You should hope that your idea is so good that somebody wans to copy it.

In most cases you are better off to take the $5-20k you'd spend getting a patent and build a few and see if anybody cares. You'll be first to market, and should make a few bucks while other try to catch up. That's what I do in most cases. While the other guys are playing catchup, I'm on to V2.0.

Good luck, I don't mean to be discouraging. Invention is a good thing, but often a struggle.


Regards,



Tobin