5 ms·

> patent troll Lovely how some can't help but reveal their true nature by diminishing others through insults. > a provisional patent (very cheap) and take a y

> patent troll Lovely how some can't help but reveal their true nature by diminishing others through insults. > a provisional patent (very cheap) and take a year actually doing something with it Provisional patents provide exactly zero protection. They can be useful for establishing a filing date, however, without a real patent, they are not worth a thing. Even worse, the application and filing will be out there for up to an entire year. After that you file for a real patent, which generally takes somewhere between one and three years to obtain. During the application period you have no protection whatsoever. And so, by starting with a provisional, you might be out there without any protection for two to four years while having a fairly detailed description of your invention in public view. Instead, if you apply for an expedited real patent and can obtain it in a year, you have real protection. There are technologies that require this kind of protection. When you are going up against billion dollar multinationals with nothing they will steamroll right past you. > how do you expect to have the resources to (I assume) sue potential infringers? Once you have a patent, few are going to risk infringement. If they did, a few hundred dollars for an attorney to draft a letter putting them on notice is usually taken very seriously. If someone knowingly infringes a patent they are automatically liable for triple whatever damages might be awarded in court. Yes, of course, litigation is never cheap. However, the other side has no idea what resources you have access to (Is your sister or father an attorney?). In most cases the patent owner does not need to have millions of dollars to defend a patent. Oddly enough, that's what patent trolls rely upon. They love patents that allow them to go after a bunch of small to medium businesses who, upon seeking legal advice, are happy to settle for a few thousand dollars. Heck, large businesses will settle or license in order to avoid the liability of informed infringement. When I used to work for large tech companies the engineers were told not to read patents unless cleared through legal. Informed infringement is very expensive. >If you don’t even have the financial resources to hire an attorney to draft and file a patent I have to file several, perhaps as many as a dozen. That would not be a trivial sum if attorneys are involved. As a self-funded startup I need that money for engineering. I am glad you can be exquisitely judgmental from your current perch. Perhaps you will one day be given the opportunity to to understand by wearing the shoes of someone having to make difficult decisions. It is also interesting that everyone reaches for "attracting investment" or VC's. As if that's the only possible way to launch a business. No, thanks, I don't need that headache.

kkielhofner 4y ago
Your original post: "In the past couple of decades I have missed out on filing patents for inventions that, as recently as yesterday, I discovered large corporations implemented ten years after I came-up with the solution." I apologize for introducing the term patent troll (and that you took it so personally) but even a charitable read of this statement in the context of your message is definition patent troll: - File a patent. Don't do anything (certainly with success) in the marketplace with it. - 10 years later seek payment taking infringement action against an entity practicing in the marketplace with (presumably) enough resources to pay. If you don't intend to seek payment what's the point of even bringing this up? Again, if I misunderstood I do sincerely apologize. I have filed dozens of provisional patents over the years, with only half a dozen or so filings growing up to non-provisionals that have been issued after I validated the inventive concepts to make them commercially viable enough to justify (and have the resources for) the substantially increased costs of quality non-provisional filings, following up with USPTO office actions, etc. Contrary to your presumption, I have done all of this in my VERY resource constrained, self-funded, bootstrapped startups. In my case we were able to make the products commercially viable and generate enough income over the twelve month provisional period to justify the costs and have the resources for pursuing non-provisionals. I only mentioned external investment because that's clearly another route people take and part of the "spirit" of provisionals. From the sounds of it I've been in your shoes for over 15 years. In these shoes I've been in the position (many times) of filing a provisional, failing at realizing any kind of reasonable success with the inventive concepts (after LOTS of hard work), and abandoning it only to see something years later be successful and covered by my provisional. I lost and it sucks but you have to move on. I'm only responding because my sense is all of this has led to you having a sizable chip on your shoulder (which is never a good thing). You are mistaken that provisionals provide exactly "zero protection" - the priority date alone makes them worthwhile. You get a year to sell and publicly disclose the covered inventive concepts. If in that year your disclosure leads to someone filing, offering for sale, etc (ripping it off) you have the priority date. This is the entire point of a provisional and provides substantial protection in our "first to file" system (I've been at this long enough to deal with the pre-AIA system). You're also mistaken that they are "out there" for a year - provisional patents are not reviewed or disclosed by the USPTO (they basically get stamped with a date and filed in a drawer). If anything covered in a provisional is disclosed to anyone it's because you disclosed it or your product being available in the marketplace contains the covered functionality. Additionally, "informed infringement" is termed "willful infringement" in patent lingo if you want to search and learn more about that. At this point I'm not sure how to write anything that you won't take as a personal attack (that comes back on me in kind) but as sincerely and kindly as I can put it you have a lot to learn about the patent system even from the practice of an inventor filing.

kkielhofner 4y ago

Your original post: "In the past couple of decades I have missed out on filing patents for inventions that, as recently as yesterday, I discovered large corporations implemented ten years after I came-up with the solution." I apologize for introducing the term patent troll (and that you took it so personally) but even a charitable read of this statement in the context of your message is definition patent troll: - File a patent. Don't do anything (certainly with success) in the marketplace with it. - 10 years later seek payment taking infringement action against an entity practicing in the marketplace with (presumably) enough resources to pay. If you don't intend to seek payment what's the point of even bringing this up? Again, if I misunderstood I do sincerely apologize. I have filed dozens of provisional patents over the years, with only half a dozen or so filings growing up to non-provisionals that have been issued after I validated the inventive concepts to make them commercially viable enough to justify (and have the resources for) the substantially increased costs of quality non-provisional filings, following up with USPTO office actions, etc. Contrary to your presumption, I have done all of this in my VERY resource constrained, self-funded, bootstrapped startups. In my case we were able to make the products commercially viable and generate enough income over the twelve month provisional period to justify the costs and have the resources for pursuing non-provisionals. I only mentioned external investment because that's clearly another route people take and part of the "spirit" of provisionals. From the sounds of it I've been in your shoes for over 15 years. In these shoes I've been in the position (many times) of filing a provisional, failing at realizing any kind of reasonable success with the inventive concepts (after LOTS of hard work), and abandoning it only to see something years later be successful and covered by my provisional. I lost and it sucks but you have to move on. I'm only responding because my sense is all of this has led to you having a sizable chip on your shoulder (which is never a good thing). You are mistaken that provisionals provide exactly "zero protection" - the priority date alone makes them worthwhile. You get a year to sell and publicly disclose the covered inventive concepts. If in that year your disclosure leads to someone filing, offering for sale, etc (ripping it off) you have the priority date. This is the entire point of a provisional and provides substantial protection in our "first to file" system (I've been at this long enough to deal with the pre-AIA system). You're also mistaken that they are "out there" for a year - provisional patents are not reviewed or disclosed by the USPTO (they basically get stamped with a date and filed in a drawer). If anything covered in a provisional is disclosed to anyone it's because you disclosed it or your product being available in the marketplace contains the covered functionality. Additionally, "informed infringement" is termed "willful infringement" in patent lingo if you want to search and learn more about that. At this point I'm not sure how to write anything that you won't take as a personal attack (that comes back on me in kind) but as sincerely and kindly as I can put it you have a lot to learn about the patent system even from the practice of an inventor filing.