3 ms·

You either need to hire a patent lawyer or be prepared to pay plaintiff's attorney and court costs in the worst case that a patent owner sues you and doesn't wa

You either need to hire a patent lawyer or be prepared to pay plaintiff's attorney and court costs in the worst case that a patent owner sues you and doesn't want to make a licensing deal. (If going hardcore, you could also try to perform the work of patent lawyer yourself, but you would need to have sufficient patent law knowledge and still assume the risk of missing some unlucky patents with uncooperative owners.) Moderate funding of this risk would be sufficient. If you don't have this initial money but you're confident that you will find certain profit, maybe take a loan? Many patent owners would be glad to find a new licensee at a fair price. Since you intend to commercialize your project, you will be able to pay reasonable license fees as you make sales.

bhouston 3y ago
> You either need to hire a patent lawyer or be prepared to pay plaintiff's attorney and court costs in the worst case that a patent owner sues you and doesn't want to make a licensing deal. That isn't what I saw... Being sued by a patent owner, if they are a non-practicing entity, is par for the course, that is often their opening negotiation move. (How do I know you ask? I got sued by one.). The suit is a negotiating tactic to ensure that if you don't settle via negotiation (which is preferred, it is cheaper for the patent owner), the case will force you to. In the case I saw, the non-practicing entity only went after companies that were large enough to get some meaty licensing revenue and they ignored all the small fry. No patent owner that I can think of "doesn't want to make a licensing deal." In fact, it is a legal requirement that patent owners license their tech for a "reasonable fee", although that can mean many different things. > Moderate funding of this risk would be sufficient. If you don't have this initial money but you're confident that you will find certain profit, maybe take a loan? If he has no money now, why invest in patent advice? The patent owner likely won't sue him because you can not get blood from a stone. Making a new company is a crap shoot. His success isn't assured at all. Why pay money now because of a remote possibility in the future? When instead he could just deal with that risk in the future?
- chromoblob 3y ago
  Yeah, your points seem much more practical than mine.

bhouston 3y ago

> You either need to hire a patent lawyer or be prepared to pay plaintiff's attorney and court costs in the worst case that a patent owner sues you and doesn't want to make a licensing deal. That isn't what I saw... Being sued by a patent owner, if they are a non-practicing entity, is par for the course, that is often their opening negotiation move. (How do I know you ask? I got sued by one.). The suit is a negotiating tactic to ensure that if you don't settle via negotiation (which is preferred, it is cheaper for the patent owner), the case will force you to. In the case I saw, the non-practicing entity only went after companies that were large enough to get some meaty licensing revenue and they ignored all the small fry. No patent owner that I can think of "doesn't want to make a licensing deal." In fact, it is a legal requirement that patent owners license their tech for a "reasonable fee", although that can mean many different things. > Moderate funding of this risk would be sufficient. If you don't have this initial money but you're confident that you will find certain profit, maybe take a loan? If he has no money now, why invest in patent advice? The patent owner likely won't sue him because you can not get blood from a stone. Making a new company is a crap shoot. His success isn't assured at all. Why pay money now because of a remote possibility in the future? When instead he could just deal with that risk in the future?

chromoblob 3y ago
Yeah, your points seem much more practical than mine.