FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)
The following is a list of questions that I have most
frequently been asked over the last 10 years of Patent Practice. If you have a question that is not on this list,
please email me and I will try to answer it the best I can and add it to this
list if appropriate. Note that I do not
provide legal opinions (validity, infringement, patentability, and the like)
without a fee agreement in place.
Please see our disclaimers page.
The following should not be taken as legal advice, but is for
educational purposes only.
1. Should I get a Patent?
This is the most commonly asked question. The best answer for most people is
"No". Although about 95% of
all patent applications filed eventually issue as Patents, probably less than
5% of these actually generate income or provide a significant advantage for
their owners. For solo inventors, the
percentage is probably even less.
Thus, from a statistical standpoint, it is highly
unlikely that you will make money from a Patent filing. You might as well play the slots!
That being said, whether or not an invention makes
money for an inventor depends upon the merits of the invention itself, and also
the amount of effort the inventor puts into the invention. A great invention, no matter how great, will
languish for lack of inventor involvement with regard to development,
prototyping, and marketing. Similarly,
a mediocre invention will probably not succeed no matter how much it is
developed or promoted.
A Patent will not cause the invention to succeed or
fail in and of itself. The Patent will
only provide you with ownership rights to the underlying inventive
concept. It may be useful in preventing
others from copying your invention or it may be useful when the time comes to
sell your invention and business.
However, the Patent, by itself, will not likely make money on its
own. The underlying invention must also
have some merit.
For more information, see my article on this topic: Should
I Get A Patent?
2. I've heard about inventors coming up
with great ideas and selling them to companies for millions of dollars. How do I do this?
The answer is, you probably can't. The idea that multi-million dollar
corporations are just dying to get their hands on some idea developed by the
average Joe is an urban legend. It just
isn't true. Most companies, in fact,
try to avoid considering ideas submitted by outside inventors.
This is not to say it can't be done, only that it is
difficult and the least likely successful route an inventor can take. A raw idea that consists of nothing more
than an invention "on paper" and a Patent Application are the most
difficult thing to market.
Invention Brokers thrive on this myth. They would like you to believe that your
great idea will make you millions of dollars without any significant effort or
work on your part. All you have to do
is send them $5,000 to $20,000 and they will do the rest. Unfortunately, most, if not all, of these
companies will simply take your money and leave you with nothing. They are not interested in stealing your
ideas, just your money. With thousands
of "customers" every year, they make tens of millions of dollars per
year. See our invention fraud webpage
for more information.
Making money from inventions is a long shot
proposition. Successful inventors are generally
those willing to put the time and effort into developing their inventions. This involves documenting your invention,
building prototypes, marketing the invention, and doing all the door-knocking
and promotion yourself. Very rarely
does an inventor succeed simply by filing a Patent application and selling the
idea.
The exception to the rule is the so-called
"Submarine Patent" filer. In
the past, and even today, there are individuals who file multiple patents on
vague and undeveloped ideas. When other
companies come up with products similar to these ideas, these inventors allow
their patent application to issue (the Submarine "surfaces") and then
sue for damages.
In the past, this was fairly easy to do. Lawsuits cost a lot of money and many companies
preferred to settle for "modest" amounts of money (e.g., $100,000)
than wage a legal battle. However, laws
have changed in recent years making it harder to get such "Submarine
Patents" and new case law has made it even harder to enforce such patents.
I do not consider it ethical to file for a patent on a
vague idea with the express hope that some later inventor will stumble into
your claims. I will not represent any
client who appears to be attempting such a strategy.
For more information, see my article on this topic: Not
Invented Here!
3. How much does it cost to get a Patent?
The lawyer answer is "it depends". The serious answer is "a
lot". What many people don't
realize is that obtaining a Patent is not like filling out a form for your
driver's license. It is not simply a
matter of completing some forms and submitting them and waiting for the Patent
in the mail.
The reason for this is that the scope of your Patent
depends upon how the claims are drafted and how carefully the Specification is
drafted as well. Patent Examiners
examine the application, and in about 90% of the cases, reject the claims. These rejections usually are not serious -
it is just the Examiner's way of getting you to argue what your invention is,
and more importantly, is not. This
examination process can be confusing to an individual inventor. However it puts on record what the Examiner
and more importantly what the inventor considered their invention to be. During litigation, these arguments and
amendments are usually critical to an understanding and analysis of the Patent.
Unfortunately, there are unscrupulous lawyers out there
(and invention brokers) who will file for narrow "picture claim"
Patents for solo inventors, figuring that the inventor will never succeed with
his invention anyway, so a narrow Patent will not matter. A "Picture
Claim" Patent is so narrow in scope that the Examiner will allow it on
a first Action. Unfortunately, such
Patents are easy to design-around to avoid infringement. For example, one attorney would add a
suitcase-type "handle" to each invention (whether it needed it or
not!) and claim that handle in excruciating detail in the claims. If an infringer did not use that exact
handle, or left it off entirely, the Patent was not infringed.
If I truly felt that your invention was not marketable
or more importantly, not patentable, I would strongly advise you not to file
for a Patent rather than content yourself with a worthless "picture
claim" type patent.
Thus, if you want a real Patent, with claims of some
scope, it is necessary to carefully prepare the Specification, Drawings, and
Claims, and prosecute the Patent before the Patent & Trademark Office. This process can take anywhere from 1-5
years or more.
Your relationship with your attorney is going to be a
long term one. When shopping around for
an attorney, get a written price quotation for the cost of preparing the application,
prosecuting the application, and also an estimate of issue-related costs.
As the prosecution process is open-ended (see our
inventor's information page and our Patent Process Flowchart) it is impossible
for any attorney to guarantee a fixed price to "get you a
patent". If an attorney does offer
you such a "fixed price" - beware.
In my opinion it would be unethical to do so in the first place (guaranteeing
a legal result) and moreover it would motivate the attorney to do as little
work as possible to "get the patent allowed" - in other words, narrow
claims.
I provide inventors with a five page written price
quotation that lists the costs of (a) preparing and filing a provisional and/or
formal application, (b) preparing responses to up to two Office Actions
(rejections) on the Merits, and (c) a good faith estimate of issue fee
costs. This quote can give you an
overall idea of the total costs
involved. When you see the whole
picture from start to finish, it might scare you off, but it is better that you
know in advance.
Some attorneys engage in the practice of verbal price
quotes. You'll hear that a Patent will
cost "a few thousand dollars" to file. While you may think this means $2000, the Attorney might be
thinking more like $7000. When the
inevitable clash of realities occurs, feelings get hurt. Moreover, as illustrated above, the mere
cost of filing might be less than half the overall cost of the Patent.
Get it in writing.
If an attorney claims them can't accurately quote you a cost in writing,
chances are you can't afford that attorney.
That being said, as a "ballpark" estimate,
presuming that the invention is a "simple" mechanical one, and the
prosecuting is not overly extended (e.g., two Office Actions) the cost of
"getting a patent" could run anywhere from $5,000 to $12,000
depending upon the attorney you use.
Note that this is not a price guarantee or price quote for
services. I would have to see your
invention disclosure in order to provide you with a price quotation.
For
sample Price Quotations, see my new Price
Quote Page.
4. I saw a advertisement on (TV, Radio,
Magazine) for an invention company. They
said they could get me a patent and market my invention for less than what
you're talking about. Why isn't that a
better deal? I get my Patent and I get
my invention marketed!
See our invention
fraud page. Most invention brokers
are outright frauds. They will send you
very slickly prepared brochures and books that look impressive at first, until
you look carefully and realize that they contain much "boilerplate"
language that has nothing to do with your invention.
They will call you in the evening and use high-pressure
sales tactics to get you to "sign up" for their service. It will be difficult, if not impossible, for
you to call them. All you'll get is an
answering service.
They will do a Prior Art search for which they pay very
little and in turn will charge you a lot.
They will always recommend getting a Patent, regardless of the merits of
the invention.
They will pick your Patent Attorney for you and control
all communications between you and the attorney. You will never be told how much the attorney is being paid. You might not even be told the name of the
attorney! Although you may pay the
invention broker thousands of dollars, the Attorney may receive only
hundreds. The Attorney will use an army
of non-legal assistants to "crank out" Patent applications for as
little as $50 each. If you knew that up
front, you could save yourself considerable money!
The "marketing" will consist of a two-page
brochure that may or may not be mailed out to a mailing list of companies. That brochure may be displayed at a trade
show (along with hundreds of others).
Such marketing tactics rarely, if ever, work. Most companies routinely throw out such brochures without even
looking at them.
Most of these invention brokers have been investigated
or are being investigated by various government agencies. You know what? In the United States, doing a lousy job and overcharging are not
against the law! Very few of these
companies have been seriously punished.
The only line of defense is your skepticism.
5. How do I go about getting a prototype built
and market my invention?
Beats me! My
specialty is in preparing and prosecuting Patent Applications before the United
States Patent & Trademark Office.
Keeping up with that practice demands all of my working hours. I would be very skeptical of someone who
claimed to be an expert Patent Attorney and an accomplished invention marketer.
If you are a real "hands on" inventor, you
may already have a prototype built. If not,
you probably know where there are fabricators and small manufacturers in your
area that can build a prototype from scratch.
It isn't cheap, but developing an invention rarely is. Inventor's
Digest has advertisements from companies that help in preparing design
drawings and building prototypes.
There are also a small number of legitimate invention
marketers, however I do not even recommend them. As an inventor, you probably already know all the "major
players" in your field, as well as the trade magazines, retail outlets,
trade shows, etc. If not, then this is
the type of information you can develop on your own at little or no cost. You are more likely to be successful
knocking on your own doors or selling your invention yourself than by
"handing off' the project to some hired gun who has less of an interest in
the idea.
A very few invention marketers will accept an idea for
a percentage of profits. If they want
to use your idea, that might be a sign it might have some merits. But beware, some of these marketers will ask
you to pay "expenses" which could end up in the thousands of dollars
and may represent the true source of income for the marketer.
6. What about Invention Promotion Conventions and
Seminars? What about invention
counselors and "how-to" books?
Are they Legit? Are they of any
use?
There are a number of individuals and organizations
which run invention promotion seminars, conventions, offer on-line listing
services, and the like, for a fee. From
what I can tell, most of these organizations are "legit" in that they
clearly advise clients as to what their fees are for their services, and charge
only for their services and not the services of others. These organizations do not try to
"bundle" legal services or claim to offer invention promotion
services. They merely provide
educational services and a platform from which to market your invention. In that sense, most of them are
"legit". Some are even
endorsed by inventor groups.
However, these organizations are for-profit enterprises
and are in business to make money (as I am).
There is no money to be made in telling someone their invention isn't
likely to succeed, just as there is no money for the Patent Attorney who
provides critical evaluations of inventions.
The difference is, as I see it, is that a Patent Attorney, as a
professional, has a duty to advise a client what is in their best interest, not
what is in the Patent Attorney's best interest - the fundamental definition of
"professionalism", in my opinion.
As you can see from these pages, I try to give
inventors realistic evaluations of their chances of success (slim to none) in
the invention business. Promoting an
invention is never easy or cheap and paying someone else to promote your
invention is the least likely way to be successful. Hard work on your part, coupled with a great invention, are in my
opinion, the greatest harbingers of success.
Seminars on promoting an invention may be useful to
you. However, I am skeptical that
displaying your invention at one of these "conventions" either
physically or on-line, will be a cost-effective way of promoting your
invention. Also, these service
companies do not provide critical analysis of your invention, which might
dissuade you from paying them money for their services in the first place.
There are many inventions, which are clever and
patentable, but are not marketable. It
is not because the invention is not useful or an improvement over a prior
design, it is because people may not be willing to pay extra for such a
product, or manufacturers may not be willing to re-tool for such a
product. Or, as in many cases with solo
inventors, the product is merely a re-design of an existing product that any
manufacturer could also re-design in a manner which would probably avoid your
patent and still provide the benefits of the design.
Thus, a re-designed closet organizer might be a great
idea, and even patentable, but might not be marketable. There are already a lot of closet organizers
out there are the market, and unless yours has some truly unique feature that
everyone "must have" (anti-gravity shoe caddy), it is more than
likely that you will not find success with your invention, no matter how much
you advertise and market it, or how many invention seminars you attend.
A word on Invention seminars and conventions: I've seen a number of
"testimonials" made by inventors attending such seminars and
conventions posted by the operators of these companies as "proof" of their
success. However, if you read the
testimonials carefully, many do not address whether the invention itself was
successful or not, or whether such success was due to the convention.
7. I see silly inventions advertised all the
time on TV in those "informercials" and in advertisements. How can I get my invention promoted that
way? Can you make a lot of money from this approach?
As I noted above, inventions which are just a re-design
of an existing product with no real outstanding "must-have" feature
are difficult to market and sell. The
exception to this rule is the heavily promoted invention gadget. A good example of this was the TOPSY TAIL™
invention, which as you may recall was heavily promoted a few years ago by one
of those "as seen on TV" promotion houses.
The invention was a hairstyling wand and was
patented. After heavy commercial
promotion on TV, the product made a lot of money for the company and the
inventor. Of course, the Taiwanese
knock-off companies started making copies right away and selling them through
dollar stores and the like.
I saw the oral arguments in one of the infringement
cases on TOPSY TAIL™ at the Federal Circuit.
Despite some decent Prior Art, the patent(s) were eventually upheld and held
infringed, but the legal expenses involved were enormous. I recall the inventor, in a radio interview,
being somewhat disappointed in the overall outcome.
TOPSY TAIL™ has come and gone from the TV. One should not confuse an invention that
sells because of heavy promotion, and an invention which sells because of the
unique underlying technology. I would
advise the inventor of such a "promoted" item to take the money and
run, rather than fight a series of expensive and draining lawsuits. Once the novelty of such an item wears off,
sales drop, and fighting patent battles is a waste of money and time.
The "as seen on TV" type promotion houses do
sometimes seek out inventions to promote.
They run classified ads in Inventors
Digest and other venues on occasion.
There are even some that will put on an infomercial for you - at your
expense! However, I was advised by one
client that in order to work with such a company, you need to have a ready
supply of product on hand. In other
words, they are likely more interested in selling your product, not licensing
your idea. You still have to do a lot
of the legwork yourself.
8. I saw a book by David Pressman called
"Patent It Yourself". Is this
a good book? Should I buy it? Why can't I "Patent It Myself?"
I have mixed feelings about the Pressman
book. Somebody had to write it - there
should be some sort of instruction manual for the pro se (do-it-yourself)
inventor. However, the legal
liabilities in writing such a book are so huge, I wouldn't want to be the one
to write it!
And also, I don't think you should "Patent It
Yourself", either. Not because it will
put me out of a job, but because you can end up with a worthless Patent. The patent system is arcane and complex and
it takes years of experience to understand it fully. Some people compare patenting it yourself to doing your own
surgery. I, for one, would not make
such a comparison - the work of a Doctor is a thousand fold more important than
that of the most important Lawyer!
I
think it is more like doing your own plumbing repair. Sure, plumbers are expensive, but even the most experienced home handyman
occasionally floods the basement.
Besides, over your lifetime, you may make dozens of plumbing repairs,
but chances are, you'll do only one Patent.
There have been successful pro se patentees, but many of them have
multiple patents and learned from their mistakes on their earlier patent
applications.
The Pressman book is probably good background
information, and reading it will help educate you a lot about the Patent
system. However, it is not a substitute
for years of experience in the business, and lack of such experience is
costly. Read the book, take a stab at
writing your own application - then call a lawyer. Chances are, your efforts and education will save you a lot of
dough. If you draft your own
specification and drawings, no matter how crude, you've saved your lawyer a lot
of time, and yourself a lot of money. A
competent attorney can revise and file (and prosecute) such an application for
not a lot of money (as compared to doing it from scratch).
But
by no means, do not try to "Patent It Yourself".
Why? Well the problem is that you could make a
mistake in writing or prosecuting the Patent application that could make your
resulting patent worthless or unallowable.
Mistakes I commonly see are:
1. Inventors who do not disclose all of the
invention (trying to keep part of it "secret") which can result in a
"fatal" 112 rejection
2. Inventors who fail to disclose all relevant
Prior Art and end up with a Rule 56 violation (fraud on the office)
3. Inventors
who draft poorly written claims which are so narrow in scope that they provide
no meaningful protection
4. Inventors
who get frustrated or discouraged when they get a rejection and give up too
easily
5. Examiners
who suggest very narrow claim protection to Inventors to "allow" the
case.
The last item is the most troubling. The MPEP (Manual of Patent Examination and
Procedure) instructs Examiners to suggest claims to pro se applicants to get
the case allowed. Unfortunately,
Examiners will suggest very narrow claims, either to satisfy their own needs,
or because they lack the foresight an attorney has as to how such claims will
be viewed in court.
Most Examiners (like most attorneys) view pro se
applicants as a nuisance and don't believe their inventions will ever be successful. They suggest narrow claims to get the
inventor "out of their hair".
The inventor, not knowing any better is happy that his patent is
"allowed" even though he doesn't realize that it may be of little
value.
In many instances, broad patent protection has to be
hard fought and hard won. What the
Examiner is willing to hand to you often isn't worth paying the issue fee on.
PLEASE NOTE:
As a matter of policy, I cannot take on representation of an inventor
who files their own provisional and/or formal application pro se and
then asks me to clean up the mess when they get a rejection from the Patent
Office (or find that drafting claims is a lot harder than it sounds!). There are two sound reasons for this policy:
1. If I
encourage inventors to file their own Patent Applications and then come to me
for help, I certainly am shooting myself in the foot business-wise, aren’t I?
2. Trying to
“rescue” badly written pro se applications is a liability
nightmare. If I can salvage the case, I
certainly get none of the credit, and if I cannot, I surely will get all the
blame. Who wants to get sued over a
Patent Application that they never wrote (and were never paid for?). Risks have to be tied to rewards.
So, if you want to “go it alone” then you have to “go
it alone”. You can’t file your own
Patent Application and then come to me for help when it all goes horribly
wrong. (Sorry!).
9. What about those "Do it Yourself
Provisional Patent" kits?
See my advice above.
A Provisional, while not examined, is subject to the same standards
under 35 USC 112 as a regular application.
Thus, if your invention is not properly disclosed, you leave nothing for
an Attorney to work with when the time comes to file a formal application.
As I noted above, if you draft your own application
(don't bother with claims, that's what an attorney is for) a competent attorney
can review and file it for you for not a lot of money. In fact, it could be very, very little
money, depending upon the invention and your work. I think the peace of mind from such an approach is well worth the
money, and a far better approach than trying to file the application yourself
and then trying to find an Attorney.
Patent Office filing and issue fees for a patent
application are well over $1000. It is
not worth paying these fees unless the Patent is worth something. So, trying to “save money” by filing
yourself is really short-sighted.
A recent twist on the “do it yourself provisional” is
the “Patent Drafting Software” scheme.
One website purports that you can “draft your own Patent Application”
with their $400 Patent Drafting Software.
However, if you read their website carefully, they suggest that you have
a Patent Attorney review and file your application for you. And - surprise! - they just happen to have a
Patent Attorney to recommend to you!
How convenient (for them!).
The reality is, the “software” company is really a
Patent Law Firm using the software gag to attract clients, and then offering to
bail them out when they inevitably get into trouble trying to prosecute their
Patent Application with the Patent Office – all for a fee, which was not
negotiated ahead of time.
Again, drafting your own application can save you a lot
of money. But choose an attorney
up-front to review and file your application and also prosecute the case – and
get a written price quote up-front as well.
Don’t fall for the “patent it yourself software” trap. The $400 you spend on the software is better
spent on your filing fee. You need only
a paper and pencil to draft a Patent Application (or a word processor). You do not need “software” to write text.
10. You've given a lot of advice on why I
shouldn't get a Patent. But why do
people get Patents? What good are they? Why should I get one?
As I noted before, a Patent is not a license to print
money. Chances are, the Patent by
itself will not make you money - your invention might, but the Patent will
likely not, at least in a direct way.
What a Patent can do for you is prevent someone from
ripping off your idea after you have spent much time and money developing and
marketing the invention. In other
words, the Patent can provide you with some protection for your idea, but it
will not likely be the nexus of success of your idea - the invention itself
will provide that success.
This is where people can become misdirected or lost in
the Patent process. Too often inventors
think the Patent is the big deal - once the Patent issues all sorts of good
things will happen. But this is usually
not true. Once the Patent issues, you
have a Patent, period. Unless your
invention is so necessary to everyday life that people have to have it, chances
are folks will continue using the same old products and inventions they were
using before yours came along.
You will most likely have to promote and develop your
invention if you expect it to be successful, and these tasks are expensive and
time consuming.
Even for inventions that are real "must have"
products, invention development is never easy or cheap. I have made a hobby of reading inventor
biographies and histories of invention development. Alexander Graham Bell (no relation) had an extraordinarily
difficult time developing his invention - the telephone. Since each phone set was leased, the revenue
from telephone rentals was not sufficient to pay for the expenses of setting up
an entire phone system and manufacturing all of the necessary equipment. As a result, Bell had to sell off larger and
larger percentages of his company to investors in order to finance development
of the invention. Eventually, he ended
up with only a minority share, and sold much of that early on, as the advice of
his wife, who was sure that the stock had "peaked" in price. The Bell system continued on without him,
his only connection being the company name and his remaining minority
shares. Today, even that name is gone.
The Wright Brothers had similar problems. They had the mistaken impression that their
"Flyer" was so unique and extraordinary that people would be willing
to pay upwards of $50,000 a copy - a king's ransom at the time. Rather than sell many at a good profit, the
Wrights wanted to sell only a few at huge profits. The problem was, others such as Glenn Curtiss and Farman had also
developed working flying machines at about the same time. The Wrights sold few machines and ended up
in a protracted Patent battle with Glenn Curtiss, which consumed much of their
time and energy. World War I forced a
settlement of many of these legal battles.
Within a few years, the Wrights were also forced out of the business
they helped create. Today, no on flies
on a "Wright" brand airplane anymore.
I could go on and on, as the examples are many
(Armstrong, Lear, and the like). The
point is, it is selling product that generates revenue, not getting a
Patent. Only very rarely is an inventor
able to license a "raw" Patent and make a fortune.
It is also interesting to note that inventors rarely,
if ever, are the ones who make the lion's share of money from their
invention. Businessmen and financiers
make substantially more on an invention than an inventor ever will. Henry Ford and Bill Gates were not
"inventors" of the products for which they are famous. They made money by producing these products
efficiently and through aggressive marketing.
Carnegie and Rockefeller made their billions without inventing anything.
11. I have come up with a new product, but I am
concerned that there are a lot of similar products on the market. How can be sure I am not infringing
someone's Patent?
Yours is an interesting question. The short answer is: you can’t. There is no 100% reliable foolproof way of
avoiding being sued for Patent Infringement.
There are steps you can take to minimize exposure to a suit, but no 100%
foolproof way of avoiding any suit.
That is the nature of any business - risk-taking. If you are not prepared to take managed
risks, then you should not be a businessman.
The problem is, it may be hard or impossible to find
all relevant Patents that might affect your business. Searching Patents is not an exact science.
If a Patent is "pending" it is kept secret
for 18 months, then it might be published.
Some are not published (it is an opt-out system) others filed under the
old rules (pre 2001) are not published, period. So it is possible that a patent may be "pending" that
you don't know about. If this product
has been on the market for several years, the likelihood of it being
"pending" diminishes accordingly.
But some Patents take 5, 6 or more years to issue. So you may never have a concrete answer
whether one of your competitors has filed for a patent or not.
If no one is marking their product "patent
pending" or "U.S. Patent No. X,XXX,XXX", that is a good sign
that they might not have a patent pending or issued on the product – but it is
by no means determinative! It is in their
best interests to mark their product for litigation purposes (and also to scare
off competitors). However, marking is
not required, so this is not 100% determinative, either. So lack of a Patent marking on a product
does not mean you can copy that product at-will.
A Prior Art Search may determine whether a Patent
exists that covers your product. If it
is quite old, the Patent may be expired, in which case the invention may be in
the "public domain" and may be freely copied (but not any trademarks
or trade dress, however). BUT, Patent
Searches are never 100% reliable either, so a search that fails to turn up a
relevant patent is not a "clean bill of health" by any means!
My suggestion would be to do an on-line search yourself
(see my web
page for instructions) or hire a searcher to do at least a background
search (about $500 or so, and I could do this for you or refer you to a
searcher). Such a search is not as
complete as full-blown "infringement study" which may run into the
thousands of dollars. But it can be a
good form of insurance (and put your mind at ease), and help you avoid
"willful infringement" charges if a Patent later surfaces.
Actually, enforcing a Patent is a lot more difficult
that it looks. If you are only selling
$100,000 worth of product a year, it may not be "worth it" for
someone to sue you for infringement. A Patent
holder may only be able to sue you for damages from the date of issue of the
Patent AND from the date of "notice" of the Patent (actual or
"constructive" notice, the latter being from marking the
product). So it is possible that a
competitor with a Patent on your product may just ask you to take a license on
reasonable terms. But there is no
guarantee of this, and a vindictive competitor might try to force you out of
business with an injunction.
Again, running a business is all about
risk-taking. If there were no risks,
there would be no rewards. So be sure
you make a tidy profit from your product, as you are taking on a lot of risk.
12. Do you take Patent Cases on Contingency?
Short
Answer: NO. Why? Well to begin with,
taking contingency fee cases or taking an interest in a client’s patent creates
all sorts of conflict problems – which can be resolved, but can lead to
difficulty. In addition, since it can
take 3-5 years (or more) to get a Patent, an awful lot of work would have to be
done before any potential reward could be realized. And finally, most Patents (perhaps 98% or more) never generate
any profits for their owners. So taking
a case on contingency would be a sure way for an attorney to go broke.
13. I received a notice in the mail from the
“Official U.S. Patent Renewal Agency” stating that a renewal fee is due on my
Patent. Should I pay them
directly? Why would I need to use an
attorney for this service?
To begin with,
the “Official U.S. Patent Renewal Agency” is NOT an arm of the Federal
Government, but rather a group of con-men out to get your money. For the $125 fee they request, they will
agree to send you the FORMS necessary to pay your maintenance fee (which is at
least $450). Read the very, very fine
print on the back of their card. I
have had clients fall for this trap, only to find out later that their Patent
has now expired for failure to pay the maintenance fee, and that they have also
lost $125 in the process.
You can download the Maintenance Fee payment form from
the USPTO website here. Our fee for preparing and filing maintenance
fees is $175 plus the actual fee and related expenses (postage, photocopying).
I recently received a communication from a Trademark
Client, saying that they had received a letter from the “Official U.S.
Trademark Department Agency” requesting a $375 fee to obtain a Trademark. Again, this is not an arm of the United
States Patent & Trademark Office, but rather a front for con artists.
If you apply for a Patent or Trademark, expect to
receive some mail from friendly, helpful folks who want to “help” you. Since your address is published on the
Patent or Trademark Application, they can download that information from the
Patent Office website. Some are merely
trying to sell you a commemorative plaque of your Patent, while others will
claim to know people interested in licensing your Patent – for an up-front fee,
of course!
Be skeptical.
Official communications from the United States Patent & Trademark Office
(Department of Commerce) will be labeled as such, not as the “Official U.S.
Patent Agency” or some such nonsense.
And think carefully about doing business with someone
who uses a ruse or con to get you to open their package or letter. If the business relationship is based
initially on a deception (appearing to be a government agency when they are
not) where will it go from there?
14. Your website is pretty crappy looking. Why don’t you have a professionally designed
website?
You’d be surprised how many times I get this
comment. People have no manners these
days, I guess. The answer to the
question is quite simple: I have enough business as it is, and I don’t need or
want a fancy website to attract new clients.
The types of clients who are impressed by fancy graphics (and no real
content) are not the clients I want, anyway.
The typical big law firm website may have some nice
graphics, firm biographies, and not much else!
Most Attorneys are paranoid about being perceived as “giving out legal
information over the Internet” that they remove any useful content from their
site. As a result, most Patent Lawyer
websites are pretty-looking, but also pretty useless.
The content of this site should NOT BE CONFUSED WITH
LEGAL ADVICE, which is situation and fact-specific. However, these EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS can be useful to you in
learning about the Patent system.
Educating yourself requires that
your READ, however. Reading and
understanding is hard work. If you are
willing to READ the materials here, you will find a lot of useful information
and can save you a lot of time and money.
Fancy graphics rarely teach anything, I’m afraid,
although they do look cool.
The other reason why I don’t use a “professional” web
designer is that I like to control the content of my website and change it
often. If I have to hire someone to
change the HTML every time I want to update the site, it defeats the entire
purpose of the site.
Also, I believe (strongly) that the “personal” computer
and the web should be people-based systems, not expert-based systems. If we revert to a community of passive
viewers (and not content creators) then the Web becomes little more than a
fancy version of broadcast television.
Doing my own HTML is educational and helps me better understand some of
the challenges in this art.
My website is primitive, home-made, and homespun, but
then again, so am I. I think it more
accurately reflects who I am and gives you a better idea of where I am coming
from than a site designed by a 3rd party.
Oh, and this is cheaper, too!
15. You seem to spend a lot of time in Florida
or travelling. What’s up with that?
On of the joys of being self-employed is being able to
schedule your work time when YOU want it, not according to some 9-5 M-F
schedule dictated by others. Clients
are surprised that I am often hard at work late at night or early in the
morning or on weekends or holidays.
When you are self-employed, there is no such thing as a
“weekend” or “holiday” except when you decide to have one. I find that taking time off during the week
is much more efficient, as stores, attractions, and other areas are largely
deserted by the regular population of weekend warriors. “Time-shifting” results in a much more
efficient use of your personal time and a much more enjoyable experience, as
well.
In the past, I took much time off to travel the country
in our Motor
home. Recently, we sold the motor home
and purchased a condominium in Florida,
which is now my primary residence. We
also maintain a summer lake home on Cayuga Lake, New York, north of Ithaca,
which is the mailing address for my practice.
One problem I see in the Patent business is that many
Patent Attorneys suffer from depression – and deep depression at that. The problem is also epidemic at the Patent
Office. One reason I think this occurs
is that Patent Practitioners spend huge numbers of hours working at the Office
in what seems like a never-ending stream of Patent Applications. After a while, it is quite easy to get
“burned out” and stop caring about the work.
I see this all the time with Attorneys representing
solo inventors. They get burned out and
come to believe that these inventors will never succeed in their
inventions. As a result, they do only a
superficial job of prosecuting the cases – wanting more to get the case off
their desk than to obtain a broad scope of protection.
This is a shame, as I have seen many solo inventors
make quite a lot of money from their inventions – and they don’t deserve to be
short-changed in the Patent Process.
The only solution, as I see it (other than
pharmacological) is to introduce variety into your life. 60-80 hours a week of Patent Applications
for 50 weeks a year is enough to drive anyone crazy in a short period of time.
I try to spend about one week a month on my boat
in Florida. It’s not a fancy boat or a
big one, but you really don’t need all that to have fun and relax. I find this technique allows me to produce
MORE, as well as draft BETTER quality Patents, as I am not a slave to the “grind”
of a regular workweek. I’d rather work
weekends and holidays for 3 weeks in a row and take a whole week off, than to
work what seems like a never-ending schedule with only enough time on the
weekends to gas up your car.
Also, having frequent travel plans acts to motivate me
to get cases completed before I go.
Everyone needs deadlines – without them, no work would get done!
16. It is possible to meet with you in
person? How can I work with an Attorney
who is not local to me?
This is a good question. I often advise clients to use a local Patent Attorney if they can
find one that is competent and reasonably priced. However, given the relatively small number of Patent Attorneys
practicing, this is not always practical.
About 95% of my practice involves clients who are not
local to me, and I probably never meet 75% of my clients in person. This has not been a great difficulty for me
so far, but if this presents comfort problems for you, I understand completely.
To date, I have represented clients in Virginia,
Maryland, D.C., Florida, Texas, Arizona, California, Wisconsin, New York,
Minnesota, Massachusetts, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, and
Michigan, just to name a few. Oddly
enough, some of my “local” clients, including some just down the street, I have
never met. On the other hand, I have
met many “away” clients on occasion during my travels.
I have represented overseas clients from Hong Kong,
Australia, Sweden, Japan, Taiwan, Yemen, England, and Slovenia, just to name a
few. I have had a chance to meet many
of these clients on occasion, but many others I have never met face to face.
On advantage I had over some local Attorneys is that I
used to be local to the Patent Office.
In the past, this was an advantage to me, as I could file papers,
perform searches, and meet with Examiners on a regular basis. Also, I think it helped me to keep up on
Patent Office changes (of which there are many!) better than if I was away.
However, with the move to electronic filing, telecommuting
(even for Patent Examiners) and the increased use of the Internet, this
advantage has faded away. In the Spring
of 2005, I had a chance to sell my home in Alexandria, Virginia during the
height of the Real Estate bubble, and buy a home on 5 acres on Cayuga Lake in
the Finger Lakes region of upstate New York.
Since most of my work is performed over the Internet, and since the
Patent Office is moving to electronic filing, it just does not make economic
sense anymore to pay high prices for housing in crowded and congested urban
areas, especially if you can live on a lake, instead.
If you would like to arrange an in-person interview,
this certainly is possible. However,
for me to fly out and meet a client can be prohibitively expensive. I do fly out to meet with some larger
clients on a regular basis (at my own expense). To me, this is worthwhile if I am drafting 50-100 applications
for that client. But for a solo
inventor, such travel is just not cost effective.
17. What is the difference between a DESIGN and
a UTILITY Patent? What is a Provisional
Patent?
I have a detailed article about this subject. CLICK
HERE to read it.
* * *
Do you have a question for our FAQ page? If so, please e-mail
it to me.