Comments on: Step 2: Apply for a Provisional Patent http://paulstamatiou.com/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent Tech News, Reviews and Guides Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:52:00 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Leo http://paulstamatiou.com/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent#comment-144213 Leo Thu, 27 Sep 2007 15:36:56 +0000 http://paulstamatiou.com/2007/09/22/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent/#comment-144213 A software patent? Are you sure about this? I think that you might be going the wrong way, but it is just me. Software patents are innovation stoppers. Not the other way around. I do understand your motives, trust me, but there is nothing that will keep your competition from providing a better product than you, doing the same thing, even if you think that yours is protected by a software patent. Absolutely nothing. Everything depends on the interest the competition has and whether it is geared enough to produce a viable alternative. A software patent is inherently evil. Now reflect upon this. Do you really think, that given an adequate amount of manpower and manhours, it is impossible to outdo in concept, performance and implementation any other attempt at making a better mousetrap, release it out in the open, without a "patent", with you as a result getting out of business? Everything can be re - implemented. Really everything. In different programming languages, in different environments and platforms. And since this is usually an evolutionary step, it can be done in such a way that you are left out of business and stay that way without being able to even spell a word back. Since you mentioned wikipedia, I will also use the same source. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patent#Perceived_negative_effects There is a big list of issues with software patents. If you do not belong to single - word or three - letter - acronym software companies, reconsider whether you should be filing for a software patent instead of establishing prior use and copyright of your mental gems. If you really want to get something out of software, there are people who did something great out of it, got something great out of it as well, without filing a patent. OSX could have never existed without the *BSDs. Just an example, despite not my favorite one. Think about it before you base years to come on the notion that a software patent keeps "bad apples" away. Yes it may be convenient for some things, but software is one of these fruits that ripe early and thus can easily rot. Just think about it, I am not saying that you are wrong; prove to yourself that you are right. A software patent?

Are you sure about this?

I think that you might be going the wrong way, but it is just me. Software patents are innovation stoppers. Not the other way around. I do understand your motives, trust me, but there is nothing that will keep your competition from providing a better product than you, doing the same thing, even if you think that yours is protected by a software patent. Absolutely nothing. Everything depends on the interest the competition has and whether it is geared enough to produce a viable alternative.

A software patent is inherently evil.

Now reflect upon this. Do you really think, that given an adequate amount of manpower and manhours, it is impossible to outdo in concept, performance and implementation any other attempt at making a better mousetrap, release it out in the open, without a “patent”, with you as a result getting out of business?

Everything can be re – implemented. Really everything. In different programming languages, in different environments and platforms. And since this is usually an evolutionary step, it can be done in such a way that you are left out of business and stay that way without being able to even spell a word back.

Since you mentioned wikipedia, I will also use the same source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patent#Perceived_negative_effects

There is a big list of issues with software patents. If you do not belong to single – word or three – letter – acronym software companies, reconsider whether you should be filing for a software patent instead of establishing prior use and copyright of your mental gems.

If you really want to get something out of software, there are people who did something great out of it, got something great out of it as well, without filing a patent.

OSX could have never existed without the *BSDs. Just an example, despite not my favorite one.

Think about it before you base years to come on the notion that a software patent keeps “bad apples” away. Yes it may be convenient for some things, but software is one of these fruits that ripe early and thus can easily rot.

Just think about it, I am not saying that you are wrong; prove to yourself that you are right.

]]> By: Bruce Keener http://paulstamatiou.com/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent#comment-144131 Bruce Keener Wed, 26 Sep 2007 22:44:25 +0000 http://paulstamatiou.com/2007/09/22/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent/#comment-144131 LegalZoom is actually good to work with. I used them to form an LLC for consulting, after given a recommendation on them from another consultant who had used them. They appear to have a broad range of services: I was not aware that they dealt with patenting until I read your article. Another resource that could (?) prove useful is DocStoc, mentioned on TechCrunch today: http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/09/26/1000-docstoc-invites-for-techcrunch-readers/ You might want to pay a visit and get one of their 1,000 invites to this before they get gone. I signed up using the code and it looks "interesting." I found several documents there that were of interest from a business perspective. There are probably some really good ones buried within the site ... I have searched it much yet. LegalZoom is actually good to work with. I used them to form an LLC for consulting, after given a recommendation on them from another consultant who had used them. They appear to have a broad range of services: I was not aware that they dealt with patenting until I read your article.

Another resource that could (?) prove useful is DocStoc, mentioned on TechCrunch today:

http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/09/26/1000-docstoc-invites-for-techcrunch-readers/

You might want to pay a visit and get one of their 1,000 invites to this before they get gone. I signed up using the code and it looks “interesting.” I found several documents there that were of interest from a business perspective. There are probably some really good ones buried within the site … I have searched it much yet.

]]> By: Arun Vijayan http://paulstamatiou.com/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent#comment-144088 Arun Vijayan Wed, 26 Sep 2007 10:49:51 +0000 http://paulstamatiou.com/2007/09/22/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent/#comment-144088 What I didn't get from the FAQ is whether a non-US citizen can apply for a provisional patent? What I didn’t get from the FAQ is whether a non-US citizen can apply for a provisional patent?

]]> By: Paul Stamatiou http://paulstamatiou.com/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent#comment-143848 Paul Stamatiou Sun, 23 Sep 2007 18:04:09 +0000 http://paulstamatiou.com/2007/09/22/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent/#comment-143848 @Matto - that's definitely something to be careful as well and when you apply for a provisional patent they ask you if it was developed while you were employed elsewhere. It's an area that can become a huge discrepancy should your company want to claim ownership. @Matto – that’s definitely something to be careful as well and when you apply for a provisional patent they ask you if it was developed while you were employed elsewhere. It’s an area that can become a huge discrepancy should your company want to claim ownership.

]]> By: Matthew Oliphant http://paulstamatiou.com/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent#comment-143832 Matthew Oliphant Sun, 23 Sep 2007 14:05:28 +0000 http://paulstamatiou.com/2007/09/22/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent/#comment-143832 IANAL either but just be careful if you are employed when you start this process. Some companies in the US (if not all, see aforementioned acronym) will feel with the help of their lawyers that your patentable idea is actually theirs regardless of where you came up with the idea. They'll generally only care if it is a patent related to their sector, but you should be careful. IANAL either but just be careful if you are employed when you start this process. Some companies in the US (if not all, see aforementioned acronym) will feel with the help of their lawyers that your patentable idea is actually theirs regardless of where you came up with the idea.

They’ll generally only care if it is a patent related to their sector, but you should be careful.

]]> By: Paul Stamatiou http://paulstamatiou.com/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent#comment-143814 Paul Stamatiou Sun, 23 Sep 2007 07:31:52 +0000 http://paulstamatiou.com/2007/09/22/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent/#comment-143814 Well this is just a provisional patent, I don't think it is as crazy a process as a real patent, which can take years. Did you ever end up getting your patent approved? Well this is just a provisional patent, I don’t think it is as crazy a process as a real patent, which can take years. Did you ever end up getting your patent approved?

]]> By: Chris Marshall http://paulstamatiou.com/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent#comment-143812 Chris Marshall Sun, 23 Sep 2007 07:29:48 +0000 http://paulstamatiou.com/2007/09/22/step-2-apply-for-a-provisional-patent/#comment-143812 Having been through the process of establishing a patent in the US, don't underestimate how detailed, dull and expenisve the process is!! What you suggest is a great start - but it is just that, the start of a very long and expensive process :-) Having been through the process of establishing a patent in the US, don’t underestimate how detailed, dull and expenisve the process is!!

What you suggest is a great start – but it is just that, the start of a very long and expensive process :-)

]]>