[beervirus]

> Utility patents cost around $6,000 including legal fees and drawings.

This is for the initial filing, and it won’t cover the cost of dealing with the rejections that almost every patent application receives. It’s also a serious underestimate—10k is more typical for the initial filing.

>file a provisional patent application yourself ($150) before revealing your product. That will give you 12 months to explore whether or not your product is viable. If it is, get an attorney before the 12 months expire.

Almost every single provisional application I’ve seen filed without a lawyer’s input has been close to worthless. This is a false economy.

[molsonhart]

>This is for the initial filing, and it won’t cover the cost of dealing with the rejections that almost every patent application receives. It’s also a serious underestimate—10k is more typical for the initial filing.

That's not right. That's $6,000 all in. Maybe software patents are more expensive.

>Almost every single provisional application I’ve seen filed without a lawyer’s input has been close to worthless. This is a false economy.

That's a bad sample then. A lay person can definitely file a good provisional patent application. They just need to describe the invention inside and out.

[beervirus]

I'm a patent attorney. I don't know anyone who's filing and prosecuting patent applications for 6k all in.

Maybe somebody who farms them out to offshore patent agents or something? But otherwise... no.

[jimmydddd]

Re: Maybe $6k all in to FILE. But additional fees are needed when the patent issues, and to later maintain the patent. Also, often to negotiate with the patent office during the examination process.

Re: Provisional-- But be careful. For example, a Design patent application cannot claim priority to a provisional patent application. So the article's advice regarding filing a provisional patent application would not apply to design patent applications.

[molsonhart]

That was $6k including office action.

You're right about the design patents. Thanks for the correction.

[jimmydddd]

It appears form your edisonlf.com site that your skill set is predominantly around trademarks and copyrights, and not patents. Maybe focus your advice on those topics, and not so much patents? For fighting direct copycats, those (and maybe design patents) are your best bets anyway, as you apparently have successfully discovered.

[jimmydddd]

NP. Yes, patenting costs for simple structures such as your BF product are on the low end of the spectrum, as compared to other product types.

Have you recieved any allowed patents for this product? I only see patent pending listed at your site. The process can sometimes take several iterations (office actions) and fees at the time of allowance are also needed.

[beervirus]

> That's a bad sample then. A lay person can definitely file a good provisional patent application. They just need to describe the invention inside and out.

I just looked up your provisional application (which became public when your non-provisional application was published). It's half a page of text and some pictures. Is this a good example of a solid provisional application written by a layperson?

[unishark]

For $150 you're buying the right to say "patent pending".

[jimmydddd]

Correct. This may cause some copycats to move on and pick a softer target. But foreign copycats (e.g., Chinese companies) would likely not care.

[octoberfranklin]

> Almost every single provisional application I’ve seen filed without a lawyer’s input has been close to worthless.

Wait, you mean they failed to establish priority?

As in, they filed the full patent with a lawyer within 12 months and then sued somebody who infringed during that 12-month period and lost because of a defect in the provisional filing?

That would be pretty surprising if you'd seen many instances of that happening.

The point of the provisional application isn't to be a patent. It's to buy you an extra 12 months of priority in which to decide if you want to hire a lawyer. Do provisional patents really fail to do this limited job on a regular basis?

[jimmydddd]

The problem can occur if the provisional patent application were to be found in court not to support the "full patent" filed with a lawyer. For example, if the "full patent" includes 10 pages of explanatory text, and 10 drawings, and the provisional patent application filed by the inventor only contains 1 paragraph of explanation, and 1 drawing, aspects of the "full patent" might not be apble to claim priority to (or be suported by)the provisional application.

[octoberfranklin]

I think the legal system is a wee bit more nuanced than counting drawings and concluding "10 is greater than 1".

[pnw_hazor]

In the olden days before the AIA (America Invents Act) US Provisional applications provided inventors proof of invention. Back then proof of invention would establish the presumptive priority date for the whole invention. The details could be fleshed out in the subsequent filed non-provisional application.

After the AIA, the so-called first-to-file rule took effect where priority date is set based on the date you file the first application (provisional or non-provisional). But for a few exceptions, the first to file wins, first to invent does not apply anymore.

Now, US Provisional patent applications only protect the subject matter that is in the fours corners of the document. The only time we file provisional applications now, is if it there is a bar date emergency or the inventors have not had time to approve the draft non-provisional application before the bar date.

[jimmydddd]

@pnw_hazor -- Agreed.

[jimmydddd]

@octoberfranklin. Agreed. You are correct. The law is more nuanced. Mine was intended to be a short example for a layperson. I thought a nuanced 10,000 word response might be overkill in this forum. :-) My intention was to point out that a short provisional patent application prepared by a non-expert in patent law may end up not providing the intended protection.

[beervirus]

What I mean is that they didn't include enough information to provide support for the claims that eventually issued in the patent. And yes, that will cause the attempted priority claim to fail for the issued claims.

[galaxyLogic]

I would think there is always value in patent-application because even if it could be easily challenged in court it allows you to claim you have patent or patent pending which will help your marketing.

[jimmydddd]

Correct. It can often be worth it for the marketing aspects. Or to be thought of as an innovator or thought leader. Or to provide leverage when trying to get funding.

[galaxyLogic]

That's what I was thinking ... to get funding. It shows you have "something" and it also shows that you are the "owner" of the idea.

I did one preliminary software patent application and I also found that it greatly helped me focus and "crystallize" what is the big idea here.

It's kind of like writing documentation but focusing on the core ideas. A patent should not only disclose the technical details of how it works but also explain why it is useful, why it is better than existing approaches.

That is a good way to evaluate the worthiness of the project. Why this, over software that already exist. A project is often useful even if it is not patentable. But writing or even thinking about writing a preliminary patent-application helps put it in context.

[beervirus]

If your funder is even vaguely competent, they'll know that "patent pending" means extremely little. It could mean that you hired a law firm to prepare a solid patent application, but it could equally well mean that you scribbled something on a napkin, slapped a cover sheet on it, and mailed it to the patent office.

[galaxyLogic]

They might want to see a copy of the patent-application, which you might be willing to show them under a non-disclosure agreement.

If you want to sell an idea to an investor it is not unreasonable that they would demand to know what exactly the idea is, which is best communicated by letting them see the patent application. No?

[jimmydddd]

Agreed, mostly. For some investors, it's just a check box item, and they won't look into it any more. But they are competent. It's just not a high priority for them.