3 ms·

To help put into a bit more perspective in case anybody is doubting the wrong direction of the first-to-file reform... Basically: "First to file" means that un

To help put into a bit more perspective in case anybody is doubting the wrong direction of the first-to-file reform... Basically: "First to file" means that unless you are able to get your product to market and publish it before another person files on your invention then you lose your 'rights' to use your invention. In business it is very very easy to invent something. People come up with new and useful ideas all the time, and create demos and sample products, etc etc. Inventing something isn't the problem. Actually developing it and turning into a profitable product is the really difficult problem. In other words: The act of taking the idea to fruition is the issue here. Inventing new things just happens as a matter of course. Now in business the reason you will have a long time lag from invention, prototype, and then into production is lack of capital. It's extremely expensive process and you must have significant ability, credit, and resources to take something to public in a meaningful way. This means you either must sell your idea to 'big corp' or spend a huge amount of time, probably years, painfully making your case to various creditors and working a business up from scratch. Now the people that don't have this problem are obviously 'Big Corp'. They have lots of money and lots of resources so raising capital isn't a problem for them. Hiring lots of engineers and lots of lawyers to scrutinize the engineer's activity and then file patents on behalf of 'Big corp' isn't a problem either. Therefore 'first to file' as a matter of course will eliminate the competitiveness of 'individual inventors' and place pretty much all the market advantages granted by the patent system into the hands of massive corporations.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
learc83 14y ago
First to file only comes into play if someone is filing a competing patent. You can no longer say that you had it in development 10 years ago and just hadn't released it. Additionally, proving first to invent is difficult and favors large companies already. >Now in business the reason you will have a long time lag from invention, prototype, and then into production is lack of capital. It's extremely expensive process and you must have significant ability, credit, and resources to take something to public in a meaningful way. There is no need to actually produce a full commercial product. All you need to do is publish your work to establish prior art. You can publish and file a patent at the invention and prototype stage. Plus, after you publish it you have up to a year to file for a patent. Invent something, publish, file for patent, and then develop it commercially. In practice first to file will have very little effect on the vast majority of patents.
joesb 14y ago
In the old "first to invent" system, BigCorp can make up document of having invent the things first, too. The only different is, with first-to-file, the "filing record" is public, as opposed to the "inventing record" which does not have to be published. Also, first-to-file means that the sooner they file the patent, the sooner it'll expires. With first-to-invent BigCorp can claim to invent something for ten years and not file for patent, effectively makes their patent lasts "17 plus how many year they keep it secret without filing". BigCorp will always have more resource than individual inventors, the different is first-to-file system forces everything to be put in public record.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

learc83 14y ago

First to file only comes into play if someone is filing a competing patent. You can no longer say that you had it in development 10 years ago and just hadn't released it. Additionally, proving first to invent is difficult and favors large companies already. >Now in business the reason you will have a long time lag from invention, prototype, and then into production is lack of capital. It's extremely expensive process and you must have significant ability, credit, and resources to take something to public in a meaningful way. There is no need to actually produce a full commercial product. All you need to do is publish your work to establish prior art. You can publish and file a patent at the invention and prototype stage. Plus, after you publish it you have up to a year to file for a patent. Invent something, publish, file for patent, and then develop it commercially. In practice first to file will have very little effect on the vast majority of patents.

joesb 14y ago

In the old "first to invent" system, BigCorp can make up document of having invent the things first, too. The only different is, with first-to-file, the "filing record" is public, as opposed to the "inventing record" which does not have to be published. Also, first-to-file means that the sooner they file the patent, the sooner it'll expires. With first-to-invent BigCorp can claim to invent something for ten years and not file for patent, effectively makes their patent lasts "17 plus how many year they keep it secret without filing". BigCorp will always have more resource than individual inventors, the different is first-to-file system forces everything to be put in public record.