[ynneb]

Of recent I have had a few good ideas only to find they are already patented.
I find this quite frustrating. Why should one person have a patent on an idea and just sit on it, while another person independently has come up with the same idea and is prepared to do something with it ?

I protest !!!

I am sure the world would be a better place if there were no patents, and ideas were open to the free market. Surely the ideas we get are the benefit of furthering mankind and not restricting him?

What are your thoughts?

Incidentally, one of my ideas was for a flat panel compact fluorescent light. (No ugly tubes)

[mc-motorsports]

My thought is it protects your design. For instance, you could have a GREAT idea, manufacture and market it for a fair price. Without a patent, someone else will make the same exact thing only outsource or originate in China and your out of business. I used to fabricate some parts and sold a lot of them. Sold a set right to the competition, they sent it to China, had it copied, and I mean damn near exact, and sold them in the states for less than what I pay for materials, and they still sell them today.

Are the patents in question "patent pending" or full filed? Patent pending is cheap and only registers the idea for 1 year. Doesn't mean that person or company will even file for the full rights so just keep your eye on it.

Other than that, it wouldn't be fair to try to produce the same exact thing, even if it was your original idea. Perfect it, make it better and use your concept to produce a product that would replace the one that is patented. That's fair game. Within reason, your not allowed to reproduce what is patented. But if GM put a patent on a new intake manifold design for the corvette, would other car manufactures be screwed? No, they just wouldn't be able to manufacture an intake that looks and possibly functions exactly like that one, doesn't mean GM own's the patent for normally aspirated gasoline intakes.

[HuFlungDung]

As I understand it, the idea of a patent is to make sure that good ideas are documented and not lost as trade secrets. In exchange for the publication of your ideas, you gain the right to spend even more money to defend your right to extract financial benefit from your idea, should someone else happen to be using your idea while you have 'patent protection' for a few years. The patent only gives the judge a criteria to render a judgement that "Yes, so and so did have the idea first, so cease and desist or make royalty payments to him."

Patents are really for those with deep pockets, and thus, to protect expensive research and development that makes for a successful product. A patent really does not protect you if you don't pursue those who violate your exclusive rights. $$$

What you really need to do with private ideas, is not to patent them, but to sell them. If its a really good idea, and you've made it work, then you have to beat the bushes and sell the idea for as much money as you ever hope to make from it. From there, it passes into the hands of the next guy who obviously must see the potential to make money by manufacturing and reselling your idea for even more money than you dared ask for, but he will distribute the cost over more sales.

This same principle could apply to books and music recordings as well. The guy who makes the original, sells his original for as much money as he wants. The buyer then attempts to market it to a few distributors for a markup and so on. Kind of an upside down pyramid scheme where the maximum profit per idea is made on the first sale, and every sale thereafter is for a lesser amount, but the increased volume makes sense to carry on the distribution.

The problem would be to 'find the buyer for your idea'. This is what drives most inventing types to try to make their own profit by manufacturing their idea, when no one else feels as passionate that it will fly. So the difficulties inherent in marketing itself does not mean that the idea was not a good one, but only that the inventor did not have a marketing system at his beck and call.

So its a risk to release your idea, but my thought is to go at it with zeal and sell a whole wack right while the market is hot for it. Then, if no competitor rears its head, then keep on at it, otherwise let it go, it's like a grown child who finally must leave home.

[mc-motorsports]

What you really need to do with private ideas, is not to patent them, but to sell them.

And patent it first so that who ever you reviel your idea to doesn't try to copy it themselves...LOL!

It's a catch 22 IMO

Don't try to sell a manufacturing idea to a machinist for example, he will have his own parts as soon as you leave. There used to be a machine manufacture called "Sheron" or something like that. They had a very nice patented tool changer, the tools hung around the spindle and could tool change in any position so long as you had clearance for the tools to swing in and out. 2.2 seconds between chips and that was under rated. I was told that company was bought out just because they wanted that tool changer design and patents. Without the patents, other companies would have just copied thier design.

If your an inventor of sorts, you should look into becoming a patent agent. My father did, he's a surveyor by trade and still has his day job, and he holds 1 patent and 3 patent pending's. I think he said once it's $180 for patent pending and $1800 for a full rights patent. You could save money even if you only applied for one patent, I think a patent agent or attorney would charge $2500+

[ynneb]

Every thing you guys have said is true and makes sense.
My question is more a moral question though.
Why should it be that just because one person has an idea that this should then restrict another from acting upon their own independent identical idea?
Surely we want a free and unrestricted market? Isn't this really an unfair law?

Once upon a time I would have agreed with the comments made about China copying ideas. These days I'm not so sure. To me I look at a nation that has to some extent pushed away business restrictions and gone for it. Just because its hurting our lifestyle doesn't make it bad. How many years has our countries business practices made it awkward for others. Its probably our turn for a hard time. (Veering away from the initial subject.) We want a free market, but only when it goes our way. Yes?

[mc-motorsports]

We want a free market, but only when it goes our way. Yes?

That might work if we had a one world government. taxes, pollution laws, cost of health care, if we could level the playing field, I would say it would be fair trade. Change is coming. People call it free trade or free market until it's thier job that is lost. I'm not saying there isn't a place in this world for cheap labor, and better them than me. But when they can manufacture parts for what I pay in materials? And that's after they ship them over seas and they are marked up by a distributor/reseller.

[mc-motorsports]

[QUOTE=mc-motorsports;440335]That might work if we had a one world government. [QUOTE]

Isn't that the mark of the end of the world? Forget I said that.

[RICHARD ZASTROW]

1.) There are NO "free or unrestricted markets" in this as is global economy.

2.) There are NO reason for either morals or ethics in global markets since there is no real enforcement or deterrent for immoral, unethical, or illegal action.

3.) China (and others) do restrict foreign operations and imports.

4.) Chiron with quickie tool changer?

5.) I agree with Hu on the "load the market first, then apply for protection" method. A fellow snowmoble crazy perfected a single pipe tuned exhaust system for two cylinder two cycle snowmobiles. He made up enough for 1 year market supply before letting the world know about it and cleaned up. Wise move IMHO.

6.) Beware of the patent attorneys brother-in-law, especially if he lives in another state. You'd be surprised with what happens while your "patent search" is dragging on.

I'll give you one guess who's been subjected to this.

Dick Z

[Kipper]

1.) There are NO "free or unrestricted markets" in this as is global economy.

2.) There are NO reason for either morals or ethics in global markets since there is no real enforcement or deterrent for immoral, unethical, or illegal action.

3.) China (and others) do restrict foreign operations and imports.

4.) Chiron with quickie tool changer?

5.) I agree with Hu on the "load the market first, then apply for protection" method. A fellow snowmoble crazy perfected a single pipe tuned exhaust system for two cylinder two cycle snowmobiles. He made up enough for 1 year market supply before letting the world know about it and cleaned up. Wise move IMHO.

6.) Beware of the patent attorneys brother-in-law, especially if he lives in another state. You'd be surprised with what happens while your "patent search" is dragging on.

I'll give you one guess who's been subjected to this.

Dick Z

I thought No6 was cured by Smith and Wesson? There's nothing new on gods earth unless you can get water to run uphill! On a more serious note.. Advantageously and preferably are such a strange way of making claims? Only thing that bothers me regarding patents is when the word "Patent Pending" comes up...IP seems a better way to protect ideas!

[High Seas]

We have a small niche product we have been developing and testing for the past while. The CNCzone has been very helpful in getting us "into" manufacturing it ourselves in lieu of Licensing it for production.
We did use the patent process as leverage when meeting with potential manufacturers (Harken/Catalina/Ocean/etc).
The patent process helped us because:
1. It showed we were serious - "some of our skin" is in the product and we are willing to put out effort (we just didn't come from the docks with an idea)
(RESEARCH - Existing products, Prior Art, etc; DESIGN - Real Images not sketches; HARDWARE- Testing of product; and not part of patent but useful -- Market Survey and Analysis)
2. Offered us and our product protection - non disclosure, etc (even though the firms are reputable)
3. Provided some much needed focus to some of the details of the product and improved the design.

We did start with attorneys - blew them off - they didn't understand the product (not their area of expertise). That brought us to purchase some great tools and software to help better describe the our product. Writing a patent to get through the system requires a good deal of effort to get it "RIGHT." That effort has better help us articulate what it is/does/how it works -- and will be deployed in our marketing/sales effort.

We will continue developing and bring it to market as IP/trademarked and copyrighted material. The idea of strike hard/strike fast for a year or so as in example above seems like a sound approach. I guess if you are willing to accept the flattery of someone copying your design as flattery - then you don't NEED a patent.

Besides, who needs another plaque on the "I Love Me Wall" showing off that you bought a patent?

As an aside, I am convinced that utility patents have their place - but if you want a quick and dirty one - a Design Patent would get you the plaque!

:cheers: Jim

[JustSomeGuy]

There is the story of Dr. An Wang. He was the co-founder of Wang Computers. He once held the patent for memory cores. Back then (in the mid '50s), his company was just him and his wife. He sold that patent to IBM for a relatively small sum and used that money to incorporate Wang Laboratories. That was the start of a billion dollar corporation. Wang knew that the patent was worth more then he got from IBM but he did not have the resources to make proper use of it. His selling that patent enabled him to bootstrap what was a mom and pop operation into a billion dollar power house.

[MrWild]

And then there is the story of Ely Whitney and his Cotton Gin. A great, bold, new idea that saved time, effort, and money. He patented it and went broke defending his patent. Everybody had a cotton gin, but nobody paid royalties. Money is made by those with money and the little guy is just barking up a tree when he tries to defend his patent against the big boys.

[RICHARD ZASTROW]

Same thing happened to me when I invented the internet. Al Gore stole my idea!!!! LOL

Dick Z

[JustSomeGuy]

Same thing happened to me when I invented the internet. Al Gore stole my idea!!!! LOL

Dick Z

You invented the internet??????
Sen Ted Stevens said the internet is a bunch of tubes....
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...z1n18read.html
When did you invent tubes ????:rainfro:

[RICHARD ZASTROW]

Sen. Stevens doesn't have a big enough set of tubes, size matters. lol

Dick Z

[ynneb]

Just wondering how the cutezy jokes add to anything discussed here ?

I still have a problem why just one man can own an idea, even if others have thought about it independently and even before the one who patented it first. Just doesn't seem right or fair.

[mc-motorsports]

Then come up with the best idea ever that will bring enjoyment and fill the needs of the world, don't patent it and try to sell your idea after it's been raped, copied, and reproduced in a lesser fashion that is both cheaper and more affordable, being manufactured in a third world country and then re-post.
Patents protect your intellectual property, it's unfortunate if you had the same idea at a later date. But if you had a patent on an idea or intellectual property, would you complain if nobody would be able to copy or reproduce your idea?
Plus, let's say that you put countless hours and money into prefecting your idea or product, would it be fair that someone else just copies it? Sounds fair to me, it would make it cheaper if I wanted to buy one.

[307startup]

Just wondering how the cutezy jokes add to anything discussed here ?

I still have a problem why just one man can own an idea, even if others have thought about it independently and even before the one who patented it first. Just doesn't seem right or fair.

Benny,

It comes down to all things legal. PROOF. Prove that you THOUGHT about it first. Prove that you DOODLED it first. Prove that you CREATED it first. And even then...what does it matter? So you have a patent issued that you can show off? A patent costs money to protect. IF you do not protect that patent to the utmost of your ability, even when the cost spent defending that patent exceeds the money made by a competitor, or any fines that may be levied against them, that negates the validity of your patent. For the benefit of being "protected" for 7 years? Before it becomes part of eminent domain? And what is this protection the patent itself offers? Does the US Department of Justice pay for your legal fees? Does the US Attorney defend YOU? The system isn't perfect. But you will not change it. You need to accept it and work around the flawed concept that they present. As well as work around your flawed concept of what is "right" or "wrong". The sooner you can focus on actually solving your problem of what to do with your IDEAS, rather than focusing on a problem which has/was/will continue to be as long as the US PTO exists, and stop whining and crying about "fair" or "unfair", the sooner you will empower yourself and not hand your leash to your unseen, unnamed "nemesis".

[mc-motorsports]

Benny,

It comes down to all things legal. PROOF. Prove that you THOUGHT about it first. Prove that you DOODLED it first. Prove that you CREATED it first. And even then...what does it matter? So you have a patent issued that you can show off? A patent costs money to protect. IF you do not protect that patent to the utmost of your ability, even when the cost spent defending that patent exceeds the money made by a competitor, or any fines that may be levied against them, that negates the validity of your patent. For the benefit of being "protected" for 7 years? Before it becomes part of eminent domain? And what is this protection the patent itself offers? Does the US Department of Justice pay for your legal fees? Does the US Attorney defend YOU? The system isn't perfect. But you will not change it. You need to accept it and work around the flawed concept that they present. As well as work around your flawed concept of what is "right" or "wrong". The sooner you can focus on actually solving your problem of what to do with your IDEAS, rather than focusing on a problem which has/was/will continue to be as long as the US PTO exists, and stop whining and crying about "fair" or "unfair", the sooner you will empower yourself and not hand your leash to your unseen, unnamed "nemesis".

^^^
$1800 plus fees for the patent, then THOUSANDS to defend it= it better be a REAL good idea!

[ynneb]

Then come up with the best idea ever that will bring enjoyment and fill the needs of the world, don't patent it and try to sell your idea after it's been raped, copied, and reproduced in a lesser fashion that is both cheaper and more affordable, being manufactured in a third world country and then re-post.

On the other hand, if I have an idea that will benefit the world, and I don't care who makes it, or who profits from it, so long as it gets out there. Yet I cant do that because some other person is sitting on it for 25 years because it might interfere with their current business practices. Even if the idea is better than the current product. Who benefits and who loses. The owner of the patent benefits at the peril of the world.
Let look at the well trod road of conspiracy's where people say that there are efficient fuel alternatives out there, but these ideas are owned by the fuel giants. They want to exploit their current ways instead of allowing others to make these new ideas. (Weather it is true or not) Is this fair?

I cant help wondering if the world might be better if there weren't patent restrictions.