What do you want me to say? I can't tell you how much it cost because it varies by product, but to get most physical products of the ground in China costs less than $5k.
>This is for the initial filing, and it won’t cover the cost of dealing with the rejections that almost every patent application receives. It’s also a serious underestimate—10k is more typical for the initial filing.
That's not right. That's $6,000 all in. Maybe software patents are more expensive.
>Almost every single provisional application I’ve seen filed without a lawyer’s input has been close to worthless. This is a false economy.
That's a bad sample then. A lay person can definitely file a good provisional patent application. They just need to describe the invention inside and out.
Re: Maybe $6k all in to FILE. But additional fees are needed when the patent issues, and to later maintain the patent. Also, often to negotiate with the patent office during the examination process.
Re: Provisional-- But be careful. For example, a Design patent application cannot claim priority to a provisional patent application. So the article's advice regarding filing a provisional patent application would not apply to design patent applications.
It appears form your edisonlf.com site that your skill set is predominantly around trademarks and copyrights, and not patents. Maybe focus your advice on those topics, and not so much patents? For fighting direct copycats, those (and maybe design patents) are your best bets anyway, as you apparently have successfully discovered.
NP. Yes, patenting costs for simple structures such as your BF product are on the low end of the spectrum, as compared to other product types.
Have you recieved any allowed patents for this product? I only see patent pending listed at your site. The process can sometimes take several iterations (office actions) and fees at the time of allowance are also needed.
> That's a bad sample then. A lay person can definitely file a good provisional patent application. They just need to describe the invention inside and out.
I just looked up your provisional application (which became public when your non-provisional application was published). It's half a page of text and some pictures. Is this a good example of a solid provisional application written by a layperson?
We didn't invent interlocking plastic discs, but we did improve them and have a patent pending for that improvement. You're right that it is copyright for the helicopter. There is also a trademark infringement claim for "building flakes" vs. Brain Flakes®
What is your improvement? The products look the same, but it can be hard to tell in an image.
Without disclosing that you too are a copycat the article is a bit disingenuous.
I'm sure many of them went too far and are infringing your trademarks, but I'm equally sure that many others are knockoffs to the exact extent you are.
> What is your improvement? The products look the same, but it can be hard to tell in an image.
My grandma used to have the old ones when I visited as a kid. It's been a really long time, but I think the originals had deeper slots and the actual chips were a bit thinner. By making the slots shallower and the chips thicker they'd be less prone to bending which prevented them from fitting perfectly perpendicular after a bit of wear.
That kind of incremental improvement strikes me as the sort of thing that shouldn't be patentable. Can you really patent "changing the physical dimensions a bit so it fits better"?
> That kind of incremental improvement strikes me as the sort of thing that shouldn't be patentable.
It is. Almost all patented inventions are improvements of other inventions. Foundational new technologies are a rare exception.
> Can you really patent "changing the physical dimensions a bit so it fits better"?
It depends. If the claimed dimensions were new and non-obvious, then maybe. The obviousness analysis would depend on the particular facts of the case and could be quite complex. The questions would probably be ones like, “Would a person having ordinary skill in the art be able to discover the claimed dimensions without undue experimentation?” or “Do the claimed dimensions provide an unexpected result?” or “Does the prior art ‘teach away’ from selecting the claimed dimensions?” So, again, it depends.
Do they have a patent on it though? The article mainly talks about IP, copyright and trademarks. (although IP and patents are probably the same thing, IDK)
You can't enforce pending patent applicaition, only an issued patent. Also, as OP notes in the article, actually trying to enforce an issued patent in court is time consuming and expensive. It's also difficult if the copycat is based outside the US. They could just close their doors and open up the next day under another name.
You are replying to OP who wrote the article. I might have missed it but I don’t think they described any ongoing legal action against this particular copycat.
@molsonhart. I believe it from your (apparently) successful ip protection biz. :-) I think the disconnect is that I'm a patent guy, and your patent advice seems confused/incomplete/misleading. But this makes sense because your primary protection tools for attacking direct copycats would likely be TM and CR, not utility patents.
