Category Archive:Blog

ByCarolyn Keane

Why Encouraging your Team to Work on Passion Projects Benefits Your Company

In a growing company, juggling side projects and a full-time job is often frowned upon.

by Sam Radocchia, Co-Founder at Chronicled // Blockchain // Forbes 30 Under 30

In a growing company, juggling side projects and a full-time job is often frowned upon.

Everyone is supposed to be focused on one goal and one goal only — building the company. Any work that appears to sway from that overarching goal is viewed in a negative light.

But side projects don’t actually have to steal focus away from the company’s main objective. They can be useful as an outlet for creative energy, as a way to develop employees, and even as a tool to bring in new clients.

It all depends on how you treat these projects. If they’re looked down upon and discouraged, you won’t see any of the benefits.

If leadership embraces the idea of passion projects and offshoots, some spectacular things can happen.

Think of it like a daily walk. It’s comfortable to take the same route every day because you see the same stores, the same people. There may be minor deviations, but usually you know what to expect.

But if you want to see something new, you have to take different streets.

The original path may be trustworthy and dependable, but it won’t ever take you out of your comfort zone or help you see things in a new light. It’s only when you change your route that you run into new people, hear new voices, find new restaurants.

That’s what your side projects are — little side streets that can lead you to new ideas.

Here’s why they’re so important:

Deviating from the norm opens you up to new opportunities.

I’m not advocating you split your attention between multiple time-consuming ventures. Honestly, 90% of your time should be focused on your core business and its requirements.

But sometimes, in order to get where you want to go, you have to take an approach that isn’t totally linear.

I’ll give you an example.

Our team at Chronicled established a company as a passion project called the Blockchain Art Collective (BAC), which is separate from the work we do with supply chains. Recently, we were helping an organization register art and antiquities through the BAC.

And now, that party has expressed interest in using our supply chain capacities to track pharmaceutical drugs — one of our core company solutions.

So what started as a side company ended up bringing our organization business. It wasn’t the most direct route, but it did open up an opportunity we might not have had otherwise.

It can improve employee retention and company sustainability.

Passion projects are often about giving people the time, permission, and resources to do something a little different.

These opportunities can be significant, say a sabbatical after several years of hard work. Or they can be smaller, more frequent breaks for people to pursue their interests.

Allowing employees to invest just 5% of their time at work into related projects can lead to major growth and new discoveries. In fact, it can help attract the younger generation of workers since 78% of Millennials believe being involved in side projectsis beneficial to their careers.

And outside projects give employees some leeway to work outside the strict confines of their normal day-to-day workload.

That outlet can be key to retaining employees for the long run. High turnover rates are costly, not just financially, but in terms of the human capital you lose and the negative impact it can have on morale.

Giving your team an outlet — even one that’s tangentially related to the work they’re doing — is a good way to foster individual growth and keep people from burning out.

Ideas will compound into something bigger and better for your team.

Many people are actually more productive when they have a lot going on.

When they know they need to get several things done in a day, they work harder to meet those deadlines.

I started my first company while I was still getting my Masters. Looking back, it’s hard to believe I was doing all that at once. But that’s how I’ve always been. Even in college I gravitated toward interdisciplinary studies — combining what I learned in my logic or astronomy classes with what I was writing about in my English or anthropology classes.

I never felt like my company and my schoolwork were at odds. I never felt like any one of my classes pulled my attention away from the others.

Instead, I felt like they were compounding and creating new perspectives, thought processes, and ideas.

Side projects at a company don’t have to compete with the main goals. Ideally, team members will apply what they learn from those projects to their work — leading to new ideas, new opportunities, and a more flexible and innovative company

Originally published at medium.com

 

Why Encouraging Your Team To Work On Passion Projects Benefits Your Company

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
ByCarolyn Keane

Why Outsourcing Your Invention’s Reviews Increases Efficiency

Image credit: Mila Supinskaya Glashchenko/Shutterstock

Determining whether your invention will be successful or not is an integral part of being an entrepreneur. Here are three reasons inventors are outsourcing the review process to increase efficiency.

When entrepreneurs and companies invent new products or technologies, they are understandably reticent to share their ideas with outsiders. After all, the business landscape is cut throat. They do not want to risk giving away their competitive edge. Still, most entrepreneurs are aware they need some feedback to ensure that their ideas are viable. They may form an internal review team to analyze their prototypes and conduct a market analysis.

While this choice may seem logical, internal invention reviews can be a waste of time and money. External reviews are a smarter choice. For instance, consider independent taste testers, who food companies outsource sensory testing of their products to in order to capture a broad and objective range of preferences. Beware of in-house reviewers, who are often incapable of delivering the objective analysis and insights you need to make sure your product does not fail.

Internal vs. external reviews

We will come back to the point about internal reviews inherently being nonobjective. There are additional reasons to outsource the invention review process. For starters, internal reviews can require significant time and money. Since the team members tasked with the review are employees, they may have to balance this assignment with their other responsibilities.

Generally speaking, internal reviews can take up to 30 hours at minimum, although they can take up to 30 days at larger companies. If you are paying employees over $75,000 per year (and, in the case of an attorney, far more) and you assign several people to the task, you are looking at thousands of hours and potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars to conduct your internal reviews, when they could be working on developing the top ideas and technologies instead. Be aware of where you’re spening money, as very little of your review expenses should be on the front end.

In addition, internal reviewers are not necessarily trained to conduct these types of analyses. A quality product study includes thorough research into your market, competitors and patent prospects. Someone who is not trained to vet ideas for commercial potential will not be able to generate the level of insights and recommendations you need to screen a technology. By comparison, external teams specialize in product analyses.

Privacy can be a concern when inviting outsiders to review your ideas. However, a non-disclosure agreement or confidentiality clause can prohibit external reviewers from revealing any sensitive and proprietary information. There are both legal and business incentives to adhere to these guidelines as the reviewers want to build a reputable business and are not in the business of stealing ideas for themselves. If the right safeguards are in place, you can trust that the review process will not expose your business’s important competitive information.

Here are three ways in which an outside review is more advantageous than an internal report.

Speed

Unlike your team members, review agencies focus solely on compiling invention reports. They can turn around an analysis much faster than your internal staff, and it will include a SWOT analysis, competitive research and intellectual property (IP) research – all the information you need to decide whether to move forward.

Cost

While some consultants charge high rates, many third-party vendors offer fast and affordable services. Instead of paying salaried employees to produce a lackluster review, you can secure a top-quality analysis at a fraction of the cost, freeing up your employees to concentrate on the development of your best ideas and IP assets.

Objectivity

I promised we would come back to this and saved it for last because I cannot stress it enough. When it comes to evaluating your commercial prospects, objectivity is everything. You need input from professionals who have no stake in the product’s performance. A third-party team is solely concerned with getting you informed answers and giving them to you with no pretense. Their jobs and egos do not depend on your product’s success. Those are the people you want reviewing your invention because then you will have solid feedback and perhaps fresh insight into whether your idea can be successful.

The worst thing you can do for your company is go to market blindly or with misinformation. Sourcing high-quality evaluations from professional invention reviewers will provide you with the necessary knowledge to help your company succeed. Whatever the reports contain, it will give you the knowledge to make informed decisions and develop ideas the world really needs and wants.

Why Outsourcing Your Invention’s Reviews Increases Efficiency

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
ByCarolyn Keane

Pro-Patent Bills Are In Congress. Why That Matters

The patent troll narrative has dominated our cultural consciousness ever since a clever Intel lawyer coined the term in the early 2000s. Even if you know nothing about patents, you’re probably familiar with the concept. Companies with no intention of producing anything buy up overly broad patents to extort other businesses with. Do you remember when the podcast This American Life devoted not one but two episodes to the subject? I do.

It was so persuasive that legislation — the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA)— was passed in 2011 to address it. Congressman Thomas Massie (R-KY), an award-winning inventor and successful entrepreneur, began his term the year after Congress passed the AIA.

He perceived the legislation would be damaging, he told me in a phone interview earlier this month, and he was right. It has been. (Read some of the reasons why I believe independent inventors are in danger.)

As an undergraduate at MIT, Massie invented a haptic computer interface in 1993— enabling users to “feel” virtual objects. His thesis advisor encouraged him to reach out to the technology transfer office on campus. With the university’s help, he obtained patent protection. Without it, he is certain he wouldn’t have been able to raise the funds he needed to commercialize the initial prototype.

It took three to four years and $9 million dollars to create a version for consumers.

Thirty patents stem from his initial invention and improvements. Now owned by 3D Systems, his technology is still in use today.

On June 28th of this year, he introduced the Restoring American Leadership in Innovation Act of 2018 into the House of Representatives (H.R. 6264). It is co-sponsored by Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) and Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA). Its goal is to roll back some of the “worst parts” of the AIA, Massie said.

Others have been sounding the alarm about the adverse effects of the AIA for some time now. They include the Innovation Alliance — a group of research and development-based technology companies from a range of industries, including Qualcomm­; patent experts writing on IPWatchdog.com and for the Center for the Protection of Intellectual Property; innovation policy advocates at Inventor’s Project; and activists from US Inventor, a not-for-profit.

To Massie, the relationship between strong patent rights and the incentive to innovate could not be clearer.

“Ideas never get developed if no one can recoup investment from them,” he explained. If ideas were made free and anyone could develop them, he thinks there would be less development of ideas — not more.

Notably, H.R. 6264 abolishes the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the body established by the AIA to review new kinds of patent challenges.

One very successful inventor I know has been tied up in the PTAB system ever since an infringer challenged his utility patent. It’s been years now. Before the AIA, he earned sizable royalties from a licensing agreement for 10 years uneventfully. Originally issued 13 claims, after battling seemingly endless rounds of appeals, he’s down to one. Meanwhile, while his patent remains under re-examination, infringers have flooded the market and sales of his invention have been cut in half.

Massie’s bill explicitly restores patents as a property right, which would reverse a recent Supreme Court decision. As he put it, “Who is going to build a building on a piece of property when someone could say two years later, ‘We reviewed your deed, and you don’t own this property.’”

In its attempt to police malevolent actors and rid the system of overly broad patents, did Congress tip the scales too far against independent inventors and small business owners? Maybe.

“It’s an economic decision, whether to steal or license. Which is cheaper?” Massie explained. There’s even a phrase for it: Efficient infringement. In 2015, Joe Nocera described it as follows in his New York Times op-ed “The Patent Troll Smokescreen.

That’s the relatively new practice of using a technology that infringes on someone’s patent, while ignoring the patent holder entirely. And when the patent holder discovers the infringement and seeks recompense, the infringer responds by challenging the patent’s validity.

Not everyone agrees, of course. For some, the patent troll issue reigns supreme. There really are far too many bad patents, that perspective contends — which is why processes like inter partes review (IPR) are necessary and good. Filing an IPR is cheaper than going to court.

Andrea Evans, an IP attorney who spent five years examining patents and trademarks at the USPTO, sees that as a potential benefit. She recently celebrated her firm’s 11th anniversary.

“I do think the Patent Trial and Appeal Board is necessary, because I like the idea of having a resource for people who cannot afford to go to federal court. It’s a faster process and less expensive,” Evans noted, adding that it must be policed properly.

Evans hosted the first day of a conference of inventor group leaders from across the country put on by Inventors Groups of America, an organization I co-founded last summer. It took place at the United States Patent and Trademark Office with the help of the United Inventors Association. We were all cheered when Andrei Iancu, the new director of the USPTO, stopped by unannounced to deliver a supportive message.

To read the rest of the article click here:

Pro-Patent Bills Are In Congress. Why That Matters

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
ByCarolyn Keane

How to Start a Business – The Mega Guide

Matt Adams from Online Growth Guru has written a blog post called How to start a business – the MEGA guide.

The guide is over 8,000 words but has been broken down into chapters. This article summarises the chapters, so you can get a feel for whether it will help you in your journey to becoming an entrepreneur or even an inventor.

The first section is about Matt himself, he talks about his failures and challenges in his first business. But he also explains the mistakes realised and lessons learned from being new to an industry that was hugely competitive and much more technically advanced than his ‘little’ start up.

Starting a business plan

After finding out more about Matt, there’s action points on how to create a business plan, these actions include

  • Getting going and research
  • Structuring the plan
  • How to make notes and keep it lean
  • Keeping the plan simple and maintaining it as a working document

How to do Sales & Marketing

This section discusses the importance of short term sales techniques vs long term marketing strategies.

Some of the sales techniques discussed are:

  • Building a website
  • Telling everyone you’re in business
  • Building relationships and networking with like-minded others
  • How to do educational public speaking about your product or service

The long-term growth strategies explained are:

  • Growing your website to future-proof sales
  • Using offline media
  • Building your personal brand

Also, in this section, the article explains how to be strong in negotiations and make sure you close the deal at the earliest opportunity.

How to Finance a Strat up

The biggest question on a lot of people’s minds is ‘How do I raise money to start a business’. The final section of the guide goes on to talk about ways in which you can acquire finance or a loan, so you can get going with your idea.

It also advises on some of the best ways to start a business with no money. Such as consulting or freelancing.

If you’re interested in reading the full guide, simply head over to the website page How to Start a Business: the MEGA Guide

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
ByCarolyn Keane

New Licensing Model Offers Free Patent Licenses to Startups and Small Businesses

Earlier today, iPEL, Inc., launched its new website and a brand-new model of patent monetization, which offers free and paid licensing options to operating companies.  iPEL has also defined a set of business practices that a Non-Practicing Entity can follow in order to call itself an Ethical NPETM.

iPEL was formed with $100 Million in initial capital, in May of 2017, by Brian Yates, a well-known patent monetizer, and Rasheed McWilliams, a respected patent trial attorney.  For the last year, iPEL has been actively building its worldwide patent portfolio, which currently includes more than 1,000 distinct patent families.

iPEL announced its Initial License Offering, available only through the end of 2018, which provides all companies an opportunity to secure a license to iPEL’s entire worldwide patent portfolio, through one of two licensing programs: (1) free licenses for small businesses and startups, and (2) paid licenses for larger businesses.

Both categories of licenses should be a welcomed change for operating companies, who historically learned of patents owned by one of Mr. Yates’ companies by being sued. Indeed, the dozens of NPEs that Mr. Yates has owned were often amongst the most active patent plaintiffs in the US and were responsible for more than 1,000 patent infringement lawsuits, against a majority of the companies on the Fortune 1000.

With iPEL, it seems clear Mr. Yates is intent on pursuing a very different monetization model. “It’s pretty funny,” said Mr. Yates. “Several people thought I retired or left the patent monetization business, because during the last year, I have not created dozens of new NPEs or filed hundreds of new patent lawsuits.  But, I just turned 43 years old, and I have no desire to retire anytime soon.  I love what I do and am incredibly proud of what we are doing with iPEL.  And, even though it has been fun keeping the details of iPEL a secret, it’s going to be a lot more fun watching iPEL impact the entire innovation ecosystem.”

Although Mr. Yates and Mr. McWilliams would not share the full scope of what iPEL has planned, it is clear that they want to change the NPE narrative.  Providing a defined list of best practices and clearly defined pre-litigation licensing options are definitely new talking points for NPEs.

Even the most vigilant anti-NPEs, however, will have a hard time criticizing iPEL’s offer to grant small businesses and startups a completely free, no strings license to its entire patent portfolio.

iPEL’s free license is available to any company whose gross annual revenues do not exceed $5 Million USD (or the equivalent in any other national currency) and is for a one-year term.  Although the license is renewable, it is not available to affiliates or subsidiaries of larger entities that do not meet the revenue restrictions.

“We know that small businesses and startups are the most likely to engage in paradigm-shifting innovation” said Mr. Yates, CEO of iPEL. “Those companies are not afraid to take risk, to ask big questions, or to dream. Unfortunately, in almost all instances, those same companies cannot afford to buy all of the patent licenses they need in order to implement their new technologies. iPEL wants to help these companies succeed, by giving them a large portfolio of patented technologies, upon which they can freely build.”

“There is no reason patent licensing cannot and should not be a celebrated exchange of innovation and technology between those with rights and those who need to leverage those rights in order to produce and distribute products,” said Mr. McWilliams, President of iPEL. “Patent and technology licensing has been a part of the fabric of American culture since the earliest days of our history as a nation.”

“Regrettably, patent licensing has become a maligned practice over the last decade in the United States,” said Mr. Yates. “This has allowed the many benefits of patent licensing to lay unrealized, and for innovation to stagnate. My hope is that by giving free, non-exclusive rights to iPEL’s valuable patent portfolio, startups and small businesses will create more jobs and create exciting new technologies.”

Of course, there is a self-serving piece to what iPEL is doing as well. If startups and small businesses do successfully build on the patents in iPEL’s portfolio, then they will at some point becoming paying licensees. “Sure, it just makes good business sense really,” said Mr. McWilliams. “These small companies don’t have the ability to pay for patent licenses, and a patent infringement lawsuit could cripple them before they even get started. We’d love for them to build on our valuable technologies without worry, and once they can afford it, purchase an ongoing license. It is a win-win for everyone.”

At the end of the day, iPEL hopes this new, startup-friendly model becomes an industry standard. “Despite the false narrative that has been spread by many willful infringers, NPEs are a vital part of innovation and the global economy.  And, at iPEL, we are holding ourselves to the highest professional standards, by giving all companies an opportunity to secure licenses on reasonable, pre-litigation terms.  And, small businesses and startups should never be afraid of an NPE jeopardizing their company.  For those reasons, we challenge the rest of the industry to follow our lead,” Mr. Yates said. “It is time for NPEs to stop allowing infringers to define us as a bunch of heartless monsters. Everyone should abide by the Ethical NPETM practices and support small businesses and startups. It’s simply the right thing to do.”

More information about iPEL’s Ethical NPETM criteria, its worldwide patent portfolio, and its free and paid licensing programs, is available at www.ipel.com.

New Licensing Model Offers Free Patent Licenses to Startups and Small Businesses

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
ByCarolyn Keane

Another Inventor at Odds with Invention Promoter

Read the Fine Print before you sign.

 

Read the fine print before giving money to an invention help company

Read the fine print before giving money to an invention help company

It all sounds so good, and easy. You have spent hours and perhaps years creating your product. You have spent money making prototypes and patents. We know those are not cheap and can take years to get. You see an ad on TV and it sounds great! They can do it all! You meet with someone and they love your idea as much as you do, or so they say.

Here is the kicker. They are in it for the money. I am not saying they aren’t entitled to be paid for their work. The problem is, they rarely do work. Inventors do not ask enough questions or talk to enough people about the company they are choosing. It is based on pure emotion. They sign a contract to pay and they don’t know what they are getting in return.

Inventors are easy pickings for a lot of companies. They tell the inventor what they want to hear and the inventor jumps at the chance. Their credit card is out so fast, they forgot to read the fine print.

Here is another inventor who fell into the trap:

Oklahoma inventor at odds with invention promoter

Don’t be the next one to get burned. If you have questions, or need help, email us at info@inventingdaily.com

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
ByCarolyn Keane

Patent Search 101: Why US Patent Searches are Critically Important

By Gene Quinn  January 13, 2018

US Patent Search: US Patent Searches are essential.Inventors will frequently ask why they need to spend the money on a US patent search, and all too frequently believe patent searches are unnecessary. There are various iterations of this question, starting out with “why do I need a patent search, I’ve already searched myself and cannot find anything,” to “there is nothing on the market like their invention, so why would a US patent search be necessary?” After all how could someone have ever come up with their invention?

Surveying the market is a wise first step, but there may be patents lurking. There are various reasons for this, but one big reason is because an independent inventor or small company came up with the invention previously, filed and obtained a patent, but then lacked the resources or know-how to bring the product to market. Then when others came up with the same or similar idea and found that issued patent they abandoned the project and never took the product to market because they could not own the exclusive rights, which meant that if the product succeeded on the market a larger competitor could simply copy with impunity.

It is also a wise first step to do your own patent search if you are an inventor. Spending time looking for related patents and perhaps even more importantly reading related patents is a very useful endeavor. If you can find a patent reference that you feel is too close for comfort then you have saved the money associated with paying for a professional patent search and/or hiring a patent attorney or patent agent.

Notwithstanding, I am always skeptical when I hear inventors say that they have done their own US patent search and have found nothing. Patent searching is as much an art as it is a skill, and if you are not familiar with advanced search strategies it is not surprising that you are unable to find anything too close, but rest assured there are always patents to find that are at least similar in some ways. I have put together a patent search tutorial, which will help give you some strategies. So absolutely start with your own patent search, but at some point before spending thousands of dollars to obtain a patent you should obtain a professional patent search and patentability opinion.

If you hire a professional patent search firm you may want to also consider adding an international patent search. Some search firms may already include an international patent search in the price, or at least a search of certain foreign databases. While US patent searches are essential, international patent searches are preferable if you can afford the extra cost.

The patent process can be expensive. The last thing you want to do is spend a lot of money preparing and filing an application when there is easy to find prior art that will prevent a patent. For this reason many inventors and businesses will choose to begin the process by paying for some kind of patent search. The expense of a patent application is saved if knock-out prior art is located. If no serious road blocks are found the patent search will normally lead to a better, stronger patent application and potentially smoother application process.

The reason US patent searches lead to a better, strong patent application is because the first application filed is absolutely critical. All aspects of your invention must be disclosed, nothing new can be added without compromising the all important filing date (aka priority date). After having done a patent search the initial disclosure can be specifically written to carefully define your invention so as to focus on what is most likely the patentable feature or components.

Who can do a US patent search?

Anyone can do a patent search using the online Patent Office database, but this database only contains patents issued since 1976, so such a search is not complete. Google has a patent search engine is very quick, and it includes patents going all the way back to into the early 1800s. Unfortunately, Google Patents has a limited number of searchable fields. Still, Google Patents is an excellent first place to start, particularly where you don’t know exactly what you are looking for.

How can you not know what you are looking for? The answer is simple. You know your invention, but likely won’t know the exact language patent practitioners typically use to describe the features and functions of your invention.

Many years ago I was doing a search on a bubble mailer, but couldn’t find anything initially. After spending a little time searching it became clear that the term “bubble mailer” was not the way that patent practitioners were describing this. I could have given up, but knew there had to be something. After searching I finally found a reference that described something similar. When I revised my search terms I found a trove of related references. To find the best results with a word search  you need to know how patent practitioners describe things in patent applications and issued patents, that is when the most relevant prior art will be located. Using Google Patents at least initially is very helpful because they search synonyms.

Next Steps in Your Patent Search

After you find some relevant patents you might find it helpful to switch over to FreePatentsOnline.com, which allows for specific fields to be searched. Indeed, using both FreePatentsOnline.com and Google patent search makes a lot of sense.

The best and most reliable patent search will be done by a professional that is intimately familiar with both advanced searching techniques and classification systems. If you are not familiar with advanced search techniques and classification you are almost certainly going to miss the most relevant prior art in your own search. So search on your own to see if you can find something without spending any money, and to educate yourself on what information is included in patents. Then before you file remember that it is better to spend hundreds of dollars on a professional patent search now than to spend many thousands of dollars only to learn later that a patent cannot be obtained.

Why can’t I just get a cheap patent search?

Before you purchase a no-frills patent search it is important to know what you are getting. Frequently, overseas providers are the ones offering bargain basement prices. These searchers may not speak English as their first language, and sending technical information overseas can violate US export laws. Respect for propriety rights may also be limited, making it culturally acceptable to take or share propriety information.

Having someone who does not speak English as their first language and who does not live in the US do a patent search is extremely dangerous. I have no doubt overseas searchers are intelligent, but the way you find references is by knowing how patent attorneys and patent agents would or could describe various features and components. Therefore, intimate familiarity with the English language and common usages of the English language are absolutely essential.

A cautionary tale about bad patent searches

One example on this point. Many years ago my firm had a client who literally invented a new hog trap. An overseas search company performed the patent search. We knew immediately that the search could not be relied upon. Of course, one of the problems is sometimes when you obtain bargain basement US patent searches it is hard to know if the search is reliable, which is why pay a little extra for a professional search by a reputable search firm make sense.

In this cautionary example the patents found related to a pipelines for commercial and industrial applications. Devices known as “pipeline pigs” are used to conduct maintenance on pipeline without requiring the pipeline to be shut down. According to Wikipedia these devices originally got their name because when used a high pitch squealing noise is made, which sounds like a pig. Obviously, the searcher who didn’t understand our inventor’s hog trap simply searched synonyms, trading hog for pig. We knew that the search was unreliable, but sadly bad searches frequently lead to elation because the search uncovers nothing even close, which makes the patent search suspect.

Does a professional patent search come with a guarantee?

Unfortunately, no guarantees can be provided. Pending patent applications are published 18 months after filing, which means not all relevant prior art can be found even with a professional patent search. Even with an exhaustive and professional patent search cannot locate everything pending and not yet published. Additionally, when you do apply for a patent it is extremely likely that the patent examiner will rely on at least some patents that you did not know about.  Examiner rejection are sometimes unanticipated. It can also be due to the fact that the description of the invention is unintentionally overbroad.  Sometimes it is because an examiner will weave together multiple patents to make a rejection.

Receiving a rejection from a patent examiner is as normal and common as paying taxes every April 15th. The key to obtaining a patent is to have an application with sufficient disclosure (both broadly defining and narrowly defining your invention) so that if an examiner does make a rejection or find prior art that you can amend your application as necessary to satisfy the examiner and obtain a patent. Therefore, it is important to understand that the goal of a patent search is not to guarantee that there is no relevant prior art that will bar patentability, but rather to investigate whether pursuing with the expense of a patent application makes sense. Patent searches allow you to make fully informed business decisions.

What about US patent searches from invention promotion companies?

There is absolutely a dark side to the invention marketplace, and inventors need to be careful. No better example exists than the Federal Trade Commission winning an injunction against World Patent Marketing, a company charged with devising a fraudulent scheme to use consumer funds to enrich themselves.

Part of the typical invention scheme is to tell you what you want to hear. Suspect companies tell you that they are excited to work with you and recommend a patent search that will cost around $800 (typically). Then they come back with great news, they cannot find any patents that relate to your invention, which should be a red flag. With nearly 10,000,000 issued US patents and many millions of published patent applications it would be quite rare for an invention to address a problem never before considered by anyone.

There are reputable companies you can work with in the invention space. When looking for a reputable company it is important to understand that the hallmark of a legitimate company is they will not do absolutely everything you need. Be careful when a company promises to be a one-stop-shop. While it is perfectly legitimate for companies work together, it is extremely unusual for any company to provide a professional patent search, engineering support, licensing services and legal services. Indeed, the ethics rules largely prohibit patent practitioners from working with these types of companies. So be careful (and suspicious) if you never get any direct contact with a patent attorney or patent agent.

Do I Need a Patent Attorney for a US Patent Search?

There is a longer answer here that deals with whether it is wise to pursue a patent application without a patent professional, but given the topic here relates to US patent searches for now suffice it to say that if you only pay for a professional patent search you are going to get just a list of patents that are relevant, or maybe copies of the patents. When you purchase patent searches you do not get a patentability opinion, nor do you get to talk to someone to help you interpret the results of the search. Most inventors want and need to have the results interpreted and explained by either a patent attorney or a patent agent, so if that is the service you are looking for be careful when you go directly to a patent search firm and purchase only a patent search.

For competent, thorough US patent searches alone you would pay at least $400 for something that is relatively simple and up to $800 to $1,000 for a search alone on something complex, or deals with software. This cost is for the professional patent search alone, and does not include the cost of an attorney to review the search and offer an opinion about patentability.

Before you hire anyone – here is a class you can take on your own time to start the search and save money – https://www.udemy.com/diy-patent-search-how-to-save-on-patents/

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
ByCarolyn Keane

San Diego Inventors Forum – Speed Pitch Application

 

TOP DOG DIRECT

SPEED PITCH APPLICATION

San Diego Inventors Forum

DEADLINE FOR APPLICATIONS:  January 18, 2018

EVENT:  Thursday, February 8, 2018, 10:30am

Name:

City/State:

Cell Phone:

Email:

Name of Product:

Short (3 line) Description of Product:

Website (if applicable):

Image (include in body of the email only)

REQUIREMENTS:

  • Prototype or final product available to present
  • Consumer product
  • Reach a mass audience (Please know statistics on the size of potential audience)
  • Can retail from $9.99 – $39.99
  • Demonstrable — WOW demonstration
  • Easy to understand
  • New product that is not on the market
  • Short, two-minute pitch

Please send your application to:

Inventors@TopDogDirect.com

Subject Line Must Read:  February 8, 2018 San Diego Inventors Forum Pitch

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
ByCarolyn Keane

MIT’s Take on Entrepreneurship

ENTREPRENEURSHIP IS A CRAFT.
HONE IT.

Entrepreneurship and innovation are synonymous with MIT. Big thinkers from around the world come to MIT Sloan Executive Education to take advantage of our renowned faculty, research, and resources that can help turn their ideas into successful ventures or social impact.

We teamed up with Professor Bill Aulet of the Martin Trust Center for MIT Entrepreneurship to assemble a collection of resources to help you get your venture off the ground. The Entrepreneurship Toolkit includes links to articles, a webinar, a 15% discount code, and other sources of business-building wisdom.

We hope these resources help ignite your entrepreneurial spark and guide your next steps. Click below and get the Took Kit

why-mit-sloan-executive-education

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail