Don’t Get A Patent? Plainly Ridiculous!
Increasingly on the Internet, invention advertising is taking an odd and seemingly inexplicable turn toward advising independent inventors to not seek patent protection, which is undeniably bad advice that will undoubtedly cause much disappointment and heart break for those who actually follow it.
But why is it that you are starting to see more and more advertisements that say it is unnecessary to get a patent and you should simply forego that step?
The reason you are seeing more and more bad advice aimed at steering inventors away from the patent system is likely because effective September 15, 2008, new rules of practice went into effect at the Patent Office that require a patent attorney or patent agent to be 100% in charge of the creation of any documents filed at the United States Patent Office.
Patents do not always need to be expensive, at least not at the time you chose to file an application. Since 1995 the US Patent Office has allowed for the filing of what are called provisional patent applications.
A provisional patent application is much less expensive to file because there are no required formalitites that need to be observed, other than including at least one drawing of some kind and including a cover sheet, which is a form that the USPTO provides on its website.
Provisional patent applications currently cost $110 for independent inventors and small businesses.
Photo by forwardcom.
SEO Software on November 24th, 2008 12:15 pm
I agree that many people should still seek patents…but a ruling on software process patents was recently overturned, so that area, at least, is still murky.
Information of value on November 24th, 2008 1:31 pm
While it is true that having a patent may be very useful in certain cases, to argue that a patent is necessary is a fallacy. It isn’t necessarily the “cost” of the patent but may relate to several factors including: (1) patentability itself (2) perceived length of usefulness of the invention (3) reproducability of the invention. In the event the invention cannot be patented, or is perceived by the inventor to be of significant value for a period greater than 20 years, or if the invention cannot be reproduced for some reason, there are valid reasons to not pursue a patent. A trade secret may be the right option in those situations. Of course, the key here is knowing what you are getting to know what you are giving up. A patent attorney may be a necessary option to pursue. However, the argument that a patent is necessary is a fallacy at best.
Matt on November 24th, 2008 2:10 pm
Getting a patent is fine, if you can demonstrate that there is a willing market that can be profitably sold to in a way that can be achieved by the inventor that will benefit from having a patent. Getting a patent first, however, doesn’t make a lot of sense, and it can be true that you can do well without having gotten a patent. The invention services may have an agenda, but that doesn’t mean IPWatchdog isn’t also biased in their thinking.
Jaclyn on November 25th, 2008 7:53 am
I don’t know why anyone would listen to advice advising them against obtaining a patent. I mean…come on, there are comercials everywhere and billboards speaking of obtaining patents and how important for your invention that you get a patent!
Matt-CapForge.com on November 25th, 2008 10:00 am
I suppose if you mainly get advice from commercials and billboards then you are best off not thinking too much about what makes sense and just do what the ads tell you to do. :)
cassy on November 27th, 2008 7:40 am
Take some good advice from the expert, or research on the internet about some good advice then make your own patent.
AJ on December 23rd, 2008 9:35 am
Patents are too important. While i agree it may be expensive for some, but at the same time inventors now have options. Outsourcing is one, its a great opportunity if done intelligently. There is no way an invention should be made public until it has been protected.
Leave a Reply