3 ms·
"Patent pending" isn't something that should be on a freelancer job board. The idea of patenting anything about this is approximately as rediculous as Amazon pa
by dave_sullivan 9y ago
"Patent pending" isn't something that should be on a freelancer job board. The idea of patenting anything about this is approximately as rediculous as Amazon patenting one click checkout. Cool otherwise.
- icebraining 9y agoJust for curiosity's sake, here's the patent application: http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=20160117642.PGNR.&OS=DN/20160117642&RS=DN/20160117642 http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=... Here's also the founder's Medium post about the creation of this service: https://medium.com/startup-foundation-stories/about-my-11-year-old-startup-that-hasn-t-launched-yet-c6d3f41e40eb https://medium.com/startup-foundation-stories/about-my-11-ye...
- orthoganol 9y agoI can understand why a profit seeking venture wants to get a patent if they can (even though I viscerally disagree with high level, low-effort software patents), but to advertise it on the footer, while sharing to the tech community that cares about these issues, is just plain bad judgment. I mean also, given it's the glorious chicken-egg problem, with only 1 developer within 50 miles of my SF zipcode for the major web categories I searched, idk if they think an investor will hook at "They have a patent!" while ignoring this lack of engagement?
- neilsandhu2 9y agoNot interested in looking for an investor, and certainly not one that says "Look we have a patent!"
- cookiecaper 9y agoOn the contrary, patents are one of the only things besides engagement that may be valuable about a typical startup. The technology/software that powers any given startup is usually easy enough to replicate (excepting massive cutting-edge projects like SpaceX/Tesla). Most companies would prefer to copy your features into their own product for ~$1M of engineering time over the course of a year or so (3-5 full-time guys assigned), rather than pay tens of millions for an outside version that would have to be integrated, and wait for an acquisition to go through (itself probably costing close to $1M just in professional fees). Startups therefore only get bought if they have a userbase that the acquiring company may be interested in, or if they have a good patent portfolio/other interesting intellectual property. Patents are exclusive government-backed monopolies over systems, techniques, or processes ("inventions") that can be used to force competitors out of business (ideal but rare, because competitors usually have their own relevant patents that need to be licensed). More often, patents are useful leverage to get competitors to agree to a mutually-beneficial cross-licensing deal. Thus, a startup with 0 users may be a good buy if they have patent(s) relevant to the problem space. Entrepreneurs should apply for patents because entrepreneurs need ammo. Big companies are not going to buy your company and transfer millions of dollars because they think you're a nice guy. There are a lot of nice guys out there, but there aren't a lot of guys with a patent that a big player needs. If you want to be taken seriously, you need to get some chips before you show up to the table! Disclaimer: IHNIWITA (I Have No Idea What I'm Talking About). Not a lawyer or an investor.