To patent or not to?

I have an idea that I would like to share with the flashaholics here. But I don't like if someone adopts the ideas and making good money without my authority. I know I should patent things to protect myself. But considering the cost and work to patent an idea or an invention, I have these questions:
1) What is the cost to patent an idea or something like the Maglite drop-in pill?
2) How much money (just estimate) can we made if we have the Maglite drop-in pill patented at the very beginning?
3) Can the CPF protect my copy/patent right if I post my idea on the CPF forum?

Mike I can't answer #1 or #2 but this is an "open forum" so there is NO protection for anything said or shown here, with that said CPF can not protect you, I would suggets not devulging any patentable parts until you know for certain.


doug

Tell me all about your idea and I'll see if I can help you. Speak clearly into the teddy bear please.

Patenting stuff is rarely worth the hassle. See Don Lancaster's book "The Incredible Secret Money Machine" for some discussion about this.

Patenting the usual way (working with a patent attorney) costs a few thousand dollars if the patent is simple and you write the application yourself, getting some advice from the attorney and having him do the filing. If you do everything by yourself (no attorney), you can get it down to a few hundred. There are some patent-it-yourself books from companies like Nolo Press with advice about this. My experience with patent attorneys is they aren't all that smart at drafting technical claims, but they're good at getting stuff through the patent office.

Publishing on CPF could be of some help establishing your priority for an invention, but I've been advised that a better way to do it is type up a description on paper, then get the paper notarized.

If you publish something, you can still apply for a US patent up to one year after publication. Countries other than the US don't permit applying for a patent once something has already been published.

Don't forget that a patent is just a license to sue someone for infringement, which is very difficult to do without hiring lawyers and paying them a big bundle. If you have to ask about the cost of filing the patent, you may not be able to afford to enforce it. You probably don't want to even think about actual patent litigation. So the main value of a patent is as an asset if you sell your business to a larger company. If that fits your general business plan, then it may be worth it. Otherwise I wouldn't bother. Lots of people are making stuff and selling it without hassling around with patents.

Thank guys for the answers. After reading paulr's answer, I think it may be not worth to patent my idea. I'll simply post my project on the Homemade and Modified lights forum once I get it done.

Edit: chevrofreak, will let you know before post.

I have several friends that have both patented and not patented their products in different industries. They all agree about one thing.

Ultimately patents are only as good as the amount of time and money you want to put into enforcing them.

The difference is some of my friends are willing and others are not.

One question one of my friends asks himself is,
Will this idea positively change a product or could it possibly change an industry?
Yes to the first brings many more questions about marketability, sellable life of said product, etc.
Yes to the latter results in consultation with his Patent Attourney for patent searches, research as to whether it will really change an industry (limitted exposure of said product or idea after proper documentation is recorded and non-disclosure forms are signed), etc.

Don Lancaster`s take on patent`s:

http://www.tinaja.com/patnt01.asp

Big budget productions can play the protective patent game , where you gain a patent on,hmmm, a manufacturers data sheet even and either use it to sabre rattle at others or as a protective shield from others rattling sabres and cease and desist orders at you.

U.S. Patent system broke..</Snip Rant>

Adam

A few years ago, I was provided with a cost of approximately $5,000.00 just to file for patent on a child's potty training aid: the "Encourage" training toliet where the parent's own voice encourages children to successfully use the trainer.
That was for filing the patent only, not including a prototype or marketing.

Since I don't have or have access to that kind of money, the idea never went anywhere. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/jpshakehead.gif
Anybody else with that kind of money is free to persue this idea now. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

I had a friend who patented a very valuable machine used in the aircraft industy. He was making a pile of money, then it dried up. Somebody had put a *very* similar machine on the market. It went to an attorney who told him it would take $10,000 up front to start and there was little chance of winning.
To add a bit of perspective, this was about the time I bought my first house, a nice three bedroom in a very nice neighborhood. I paid $16,000 for it...

Note that publishing your idea in sufficient detail will prevent it from being patented by someone else. A posting to an online forum
like CPF may or may not qualify as "publishing." I don't have a
lot of sympathy with people who expect a stream of income from a
patent without doing much (or any) of the work needed to make it
into a product and sell it, but mentioning an idea offhand and
having SOMEONE ELSE patent it has gotta really suck...

(These days, patents seem to be used mostly as "trading cards" for
large companies. If you happen to infringe on someone's (obvious)
patent, it's a lot easier to come to an arrangement if you can find
some of YOUR obvious patents that THEY infringe on. (usually a
cross license agreement.) Actually defending your patent or proving
someone else's to be invalid is much harder and more expensive.)

Cross licensing mainly happens between big companies and other big companies. When it's a big company vs. a small one, the big company just does what it can to crush the small one.

If you were to patent a drop-in pill for a Maglite, it would be VERY easy for someone to get it thrown out, since there are already similar products on the market (i.e. it's not innovative). A better route would be to file as an "industrial design" (doesn't protect what it does, but it protects the "look and feel"). Whatever you do, DON'T give details here on anything you're planning to patent - if you publish before you file for a patent, and someone challenging your patent can prove that you did so, your patent can be thrown out.

Just a couple of observations (having been involved in a number of patent litigations through trial and appeal): paulr is correct in saying: "Ultimately patents are only as good as the amount of time and money you want to put into enforcing them." One should also keep in mind that litigations involving patents tend to be more expensive than "normal" litigations for reasons that include, but are not limited, to the following: Patent litigations almost always require the participation of expert witnesses (usually at least two per side, one for technical issue and one for damages) who, in my personal experience, can charge up to $900 per hour; every patent case involves "construing" the claims of the patent in suit -- this usually involves what is commonly referred to as a "Markman hearing" which can be quite expensive, sometimes amounting to a sort of "mini-trial" complete with expert testimony and the attendant preparation, expensive demonstrative exhibits and plenty of attorney time; discovery tend to be more voluminous and often include the depositions of more witnesses than in other types of cases -- some of the cases I have been involved with have required prying the lids off of and examining the contents of literally thousands of boxes of documents; the prospect of repeated appeals in the same action is very real -- I have personally been involved in actions that have been to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (the court that hears all appeals in patent actions) multiple times; finally, patent suits with their attendant complexity of issues often take longer than other suits -- some of the actions can take more than 10 years. All this can be quite expensive -- it is not unreasonable to expect that the cost of a patent action, through verdict (but not appeal) can easily exceed $1M.

That said, there are other reasons for obtaining patents than expecting to litigate them. For example, a portfolio of patents may enhance the value of a company that is being or going to be sold.

Regarding patenting something yourself, keep in mind that if the patent is on something that will be a real money maker it may very well be the subject of litigation (or, if you are licensing it, subject to close scrutiny by potential licensees). The process of obtaining a patent in the US (called patent "prosecution") involves a number of pitfalls for the unwary -- an example: statements made during the prosecution of the patent, or even adjustments of the wording of claims may lead to "prosecution history estoppel" that limits the scope of the claimed invention.

Re discussions of potentially patentable subject matter. Section 102(b) of Title 35 of the US Code sets a statutory bar on patentability of inventions in "public use" or "on sale" more than one year prior to the filing of an application for patent. What constitutes a "public use" and potential exceptions to the bar may be difficult for the non-initaited to discern and are a pitfall that form the nucleus of invalitity contentions in every patent litigation I have been involved in.

Regarding getting priority for an invention -- the issue of what constitutes the patentable subject matter is usually a matter of contention in litigations. The scope of the invention may change before or during the process of prosecution because of the prior art, etc. Sometimes, therefore, what the inventor actually initially believes to be the invention does not coincide with that which is claimed.

One should always seek the advice of competent legal counsel on these matters. This, unfortunately, usually brings added expense.

One more thing to consider: File a Provisional Patent Application.

The Provisional Application is a relatively new thing which was created as a tool for the 'independent inventor'. In a nutshell, here's what it is...

It is a simple, inexpensive way for the 'little guy' to file an application which offers some measure of protection of the idea. It costs $100 (last I checked) and you don't need an attorney to do it. The patent office will not review or accept or reject the application in any way. The purpose of the application is to buy you some time to develop the idea and evalute its market potential. Once you file the application, your product is officially 'Patent Pending', and you have an official filing date. The Provisional Application is held for one year only. During that year you must decide whether it's worth it to file a 'real' application for a patent (and do a patent search). But, you've had a year to develop and test the idea, with some protection and proof of when you came up with the idea, all for $100. Not bad. But you have to file a real patent within a year or you lose any patentability.

Do a search on google for provisional patent application and you will learn a lot more about it than I can describe - might be worth a shot. Good luck!