Patent Pitfalls, or Something

[Real Deal Denver]

(Here is a new thread that will deal with the intricacies of patents. This is a continuation from the thread dealing with a specific product, which was motorized curtain controllers.)

Very good points. Thank you for your insight @Mark Trade

In the first example, you say I can patent the buttons, for example, which may be used on other non-related products. Let's say I use existing buttons from a different product, which I have not invented. I haven't really invented anything then - I have combined existing patented products in a new way though. So would I owe royalties to the patent holders of the hairdryer and the button designer then? What would "my" patent be - since it is a new product that didn't exist before.

The same applies for the second product. I did not invent the phone or the holographic image projector.

This equally fascinating and equally frustrating. But I am seeing things in a way that I haven't before, and I have read dozens of books on inventing and patents. None of them looked at things this way - I guess that's why I kept buying books looking for the complete answer.

As far as the curtain rods which is the topic of this thread; the same would apply. This could be a combination of already existing products - the rods, the motor, the control, etc. And what if I took that finished invention and, say, made it waterproof so it could be used for a shower curtain or an outside patio? Same invention - but then again, not.

I read about the paper clip being invented. Then someone came along and cut ribs into it so it would hold the papers better without slipping. The new paper clip was considered a new invention, in spite of the fact that it was an exact copy of the other paper clip, except for the added feature...

Thanks for the insight. I can't wait for your response!

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Mark Trade]

I did reply on the other topic, but it was overlooked, so did a bit of copy and paste. I did my reply in red italics.

Very good points. Thank you for your insight.

However.

In the first example, you say I can patent the buttons, for example, which may be used on other non-related products. Let's say I use existing buttons from a different product, which I have not invented. I haven't really invented anything then - I have combined existing patented products in a new way though. So would I owe royalties to the patent holders of the hairdryer and the button designer then? What would "my" patent be - since it is a new product that didn't exist before.

What I meant by the buttons / controller is, are they the right ones for the Walmart Dryer, model 101. In other words, do they get hot to the touch, or could they cause burns to a small child after 5-10 mins use, as does the Dryer itself, could it cause someone an injury. Do you have to turn off the Dryer and wait 5mins, for it too cool down before using again. So you've done your homework and you figure, the buttons on your brothers Walmart Soldering Iron, model 102, would work far far better, they don't get hot, but the iron itself does. So you do a little button swapping to prove your theory correct. (Your brothers at work, he will never know, plus you don't care if he does anyway, you don't like him). You haven't invented a new button or controller, you have simply found a better button / controller that better suits the Dryer (see 1). In the real world, it's called product improvement. Companies who make and sell appliances are looking for product improvement ideas.

(1) (but you could add a controller to control the heat on the Walmart 102, ie; variable temp from 90 degrees to 700 degrees, for different items needing soldering).!!! Just a thought.

So, who do you owe royalties too. No-one, you haven't invented anything. You have simply made an improvement to an already existing item. You have however, just created an income for yourself. Find out who makes the buttons on the Soldering Iron, and approach them, say you have a potential market for there heat resistant buttons, would they be interested in an agency agreement. That's your first income stream, now for the second. Approach the Hair Dryer supplier and tell them about your product improvement idea, hell why you are at it, approach all suppliers of Hair Dryers. Same thing, see if they are interested in an agency agreement, they use the heat resistant button on their Dryers. Sales improve across the range by 30%, your now getting royalties from 1 -50 sources. A seller and suppliers. Ka-Ching.

The same applies for the second product. I did not invent the phone or the holographic image projector.

This equally fascinating and equally frustrating. But I am seeing things in a way that I haven't before, and I have read dozens of books on inventing and patents. None of them looked at things this way - I guess that's why I kept buying books looking for the complete answer.

As far as the curtain rods which is the topic of this thread; the same would apply. This could be a combination of already existing products - the rods, the motor, the control, etc. And what if I took that finished invention and, say, made it waterproof so it could be used for a shower curtain or an outside patio? Same invention - but then again, not.

Same madness, applies for the curtain rods, motors, controls etc. Remember not all windows are the same width apart, nor curtain drop, so a stronger motor might be required, as will rods, fittings and screws. Remember curtains weigh something, everything does. Wheres the power supply going to come from to open and close the curtains. Maybe transformers will be needed, 240v will not make a 12v motor work, but it will spin bloody fast for 3 seconds and then burst into flames. Think of the many combinations required in that last argument.!!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This little piece wasn't in the reply, but added today, the idea for the window curtain opener, cant be patented, because it was patented years ago, case in point, Cinema's and Operas have used them since the 1970's. However the process mentioned could be classed as an improvement. Perhaps a trip to a local general and hardware, to check out auto timers for lawn sprinkler systems would be a good place to start. The one I have, you can turn the sprinkler on at 8am, turn it off at 8:15am, then on again at 1pm and off at 3:30pm. Why have I mentioned that.??????

If a timer was added to the auto curtain opener, it may suit a purpose in an old folks home or retirement village, whereby you could advance the closing of the curtian by inches at a time, as the sun makes it's arc across the window. Same goes for opening it in the morning..!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I read about the paper clip being invented. Then someone came along and cut ribs into it so it would hold the papers better without slipping. The new paper clip was considered a new invention, in spite of the fact that it was an exact copy of the other paper clip, except for the added feature...

The paper clip was invented as you say as a simple piece of steel bent in two, then someone made an improvement, by adding crinkles. There was also another improvement, where rubber ends were added, to stop women stabbing themselves in the head. Regardless of how many improvements or modifications have been made to the humble hair clip, whoever invented it first and whomever (now) still holds that original patent, (annual fees up to date etc) be it family, or a trust, they will still get royalty payments. When you lodge a patent such as a hairclip, the patent office will see if your patent is identical to one already registered. If it is, they will advise and "why".

That is not the end of the world, if it is identical, they are simply pointing it out. You then have to figure out how to reply. It could be as simple as a button or a controller.

Thanks for the insight. I can't wait for your response!

 

[Real Deal Denver]

Fascinating. One answer opens three more questions.

Let's make this more complex, so the details can be worked out better.

Let's say I find XYZ mfg co in China that makes hair dryers. I want to have them make a totally new design of hairdryer, using the parts they already have.

My hairdryer will have three chutes on it that blow hair, so it can cover the back and two sides of a head at the same time. This "three-headed" hairdryer is actually a totally new thing as nothing like it exists, but it is using existing parts from other hair dryers already in production. Is it a new thing that I can patent as a "multi-output" hairdryer - or is it an improvement?

Let's say I want to add a brush attachment to the front of it, which no hairdryer has. Now I am adding a new part, but it is already an existing part that is just being "combined" with the hair dryer. Is that a new invention or an improvement?

In case A, what if they like my concept, but make their own design using two output chutes instead of three, like my design? If I can get a patent on my new "multi-output" design, I should be able to stop them, no matter what their design is, right?

At what point does combining a design stop? I have two inventions that are made from combining two other products into one greatly improved product - but I'm not using those two products as they exist. It's not as easy as replacing buttons and keeping everything else the same. I am redesigning the entire look and function of the product, although the product will use the same internal parts, i.e. motor and blower fan, in the case of a hairdryer.

There is also the possibility that the button designer would say no to me - or the hairdryer might say no as well. I worked in the office machine biz for a long time. I was always amazed at the new ribbon designs that would come out for each different model of typewriter. The companies would spend a huge amount of money to make a totally new ribbon cartridge, instead of using an existing one that worked perfectly fine. At the end of the day, a ribbon is a ribbon - just use last year's model. But they never did. As a dealer, that meant we had to stock ANOTHER style of ribbon. We didn't make money on ribbons - it was a pain in the but - and the last thing we wanted was MORE styles to stock. But the manufacturers did that for what? I'm guessing to save the 20 cents to pay for some royalty to an already existing design? Maddening!

Thanks for your insight.

 

[Mark Trade]

Fascinating. One answer opens three more questions.

Let's make this more complex, so the details can be worked out better.

Let's say I find XYZ mfg co in China that makes hair dryers. I want to have them make a totally new design of hairdryer, using the parts they already have.

My hairdryer will have three chutes on it that blow hair, so it can cover the back and two sides of a head at the same time. This "three-headed" hairdryer is actually a totally new thing as nothing like it exists, but it is using existing parts from other hair dryers already in production. Is it a new thing that I can patent as a "multi-output" hairdryer - or is it an improvement?

Let's say I want to add a brush attachment to the front of it, which no hairdryer has. Now I am adding a new part, but it is already an existing part that is just being "combined" with the hair dryer. Is that a new invention or an improvement?

In case A, what if they like my concept, but make their own design using two output chutes instead of three, like my design? If I can get a patent on my new "multi-output" design, I should be able to stop them, no matter what their design is, right?

At what point does combining a design stop? I have two inventions that are made from combining two other products into one greatly improved product - but I'm not using those two products as they exist. It's not as easy as replacing buttons and keeping everything else the same. I am redesigning the entire look and function of the product, although the product will use the same internal parts, i.e. motor and blower fan, in the case of a hairdryer.

There is also the possibility that the button designer would say no to me - or the hairdryer might say no as well. I worked in the office machine biz for a long time. I was always amazed at the new ribbon designs that would come out for each different model of typewriter. The companies would spend a huge amount of money to make a totally new ribbon cartridge, instead of using an existing one that worked perfectly fine. At the end of the day, a ribbon is a ribbon - just use last year's model. But they never did. As a dealer, that meant we had to stock ANOTHER style of ribbon. We didn't make money on ribbons - it was a pain in the but - and the last thing we wanted was MORE styles to stock. But the manufacturers did that for what? I'm guessing to save the 20 cents to pay for some royalty to an already existing design? Maddening!

Thanks for your insight.

Have a look at this attachment first, then feel free to visit the link provided and have a browse. In the meantime, I will dig up some info and make a reply, so you have the correct information to work from.

WIPO - Search International and National Patent Collections

patentscope.wipo.int

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Bertram]

Google Patents

Search and read the full text of patents from around the world with Google Patents, and find prior art in our index of non-patent literature.

patents.google.com

For anyone driving by this thread, it's about two simple questions :
Can you patent an improvement on something patent-protected, and if so on what premise?
Yes, it's called a patent innovation.
(See #7)
Public domain not discussed so far.
How to search for patents and "prior art":
Patents.google is proprietary art for international patent searches and a great start for "prior art" searches.

 

[Real Deal Denver]

Have a look at this attachment first, then feel free to visit the link provided and have a browse. In the meantime, I will dig up some info and make a reply, so you have the correct information to work from.

WIPO - Search International and National Patent Collections

patentscope.wipo.int

I guess this is why I buy so many books. I am not asking for patent information on a hairdryer, or how to search for patents.

I am asking how to MARKET a hairdryer that is made from existing parts, but which is very different. Is a three-headed hairdryer very different? Yes? Since it is using the same parts though, is it an improvement? Yes? Can it be patented? Yes? So WHAT is it? It can't be all three.

Let's take something else. Let's say (assuming this does not exist, even though it does) a three-wheeled motorcycle using all the same parts as the two-wheeled motorcycle. I've added a third wheel for stability. Different? Yes. Improvement? Yes. Eligible for a patent? Yes. What if I use different parts, like taking a Honda frame and using a Harley engine, with a Kawaski seat and gauge set? All existing parts - but the bike is a totally new design. What did I improve? The engine? The frame? The seat? What if I copy each part but change them all slightly, instead of using existing parts? I'll make the seat three inches longer, for example - now it's not the same seat. Let's say I do that for EVERY part on the motorcycle. Slight modifications, but a totally new and different product as the end result. I'm not stealing a patent because my product is not the same as theirs, although I am using PARTS of their design. Carry this further - EVERY motorcycle has a seat. Does the guy that patented an elongated seat collect royalties from every motorcycle manufacturer?

I'm just trying to define 1) where the line exists between an improvement over an existing product, versus defining it as a new product, and 2) how my design can be protected from someone stealing it but slightly modifying it. Say, for a hairdryer, having two chutes instead of three. Or keeping my three chutes but make them angled. Or adding long vents along the sides instead of one big opening at the end. I'm NOT talking about hairdryers - I'm talking about how the design could be changed in twenty different ways and thus circumvent my patent.

Let's take something even more simple. I have been in fancy restaurants where the forks had three prongs instead of four. Is that a new design or an improvement on an existing design? Please don't show me patents on forks!

Spoons. I hate soup spoons. Who thought of making spoons fat and wide? They are hard to fit in your mouth. New design or improvement?

NOW, if I did want to market an improvement to a hairdryer, such as changing the buttons only, which is what you have discussed, that is clearly an addition, or improvement, to an existing product. But, I'm thinking about combining, say, the features of four hairdryers, and thus coming up with a completely new design. Can anyone of the four portions of my designs be claimed as already patented? Of COURSE it is going to have design elements of other hairdryers incorporated into it, otherwise, it wouldn't be a hairdryer. I have to have buttons - a motor - a blower, etc. When does it stop being an improvement and become a new product?

Golf Clubs. Maybe my design has a bigger face for the club. New design or improvement? I can understand it is hard to make a "new" design for a golf club. From a distance, they do all look the same. Not so with a three-wheeled motorcycle or a three-headed hairdryer. If I name it something different, then does it not infringe? A tricycle is not a motorcycle, for example. A tri headed dryer is not the same as a hairdryer. I didn't say it was a three-wheeled MOTORCYCLE. I used a completely different name. I also did not call the other product a hairdryer.

Interesting. There have to be lines separating features as new designs or improvements on existing designs, or this nit-picking on features could go on forever.

 

[Bertram]

I guess this is why I buy so many books. I am not asking for patent information on a hairdryer, or how to search for patents.

I am asking how to MARKET a hairdryer that is made from existing parts, but which is very different. Is a three-headed hairdryer very different? Yes? Since it is using the same parts though, is it an improvement? Yes? Can it be patented? Yes? So WHAT is it? It can't be all three.

Let's take something else. Let's say (assuming this does not exist, even though it does) a three-wheeled motorcycle using all the same parts as the two-wheeled motorcycle. I've added a third wheel for stability. Different? Yes. Improvement? Yes. Eligible for a patent? Yes. What if I use different parts, like taking a Honda frame and using a Harley engine, with a Kawaski seat and gauge set? All existing parts - but the bike is a totally new design. What did I improve? The engine? The frame? The seat? What if I copy each part but change them all slightly, instead of using existing parts? I'll make the seat three inches longer, for example - now it's not the same seat. Let's say I do that for EVERY part on the motorcycle. Slight modifications, but a totally new and different product as the end result. I'm not stealing a patent because my product is not the same as theirs, although I am using PARTS of their design. Carry this further - EVERY motorcycle has a seat. Does the guy that patented an elongated seat collect royalties from every motorcycle manufacturer?

I'm just trying to define 1) where the line exists between an improvement over an existing product, versus defining it as a new product, and 2) how my design can be protected from someone stealing it but slightly modifying it. Say, for a hairdryer, having two chutes instead of three. Or keeping my three chutes but make them angled. Or adding long vents along the sides instead of one big opening at the end. I'm NOT talking about hairdryers - I'm talking about how the design could be changed in twenty different ways and thus circumvent my patent.

Let's take something even more simple. I have been in fancy restaurants where the forks had three prongs instead of four. Is that a new design or an improvement on an existing design? Please don't show me patents on forks!

Spoons. I hate soup spoons. Who thought of making spoons fat and wide? They are hard to fit in your mouth. New design or improvement?

NOW, if I did want to market an improvement to a hairdryer, such as changing the buttons only, which is what you have discussed, that is clearly an addition, or improvement, to an existing product. But, I'm thinking about combining, say, the features of four hairdryers, and thus coming up with a completely new design. Can anyone of the four portions of my designs be claimed as already patented? Of COURSE it is going to have design elements of other hairdryers incorporated into it, otherwise, it wouldn't be a hairdryer. I have to have buttons - a motor - a blower, etc. When does it stop being an improvement and become a new product?

Golf Clubs. Maybe my design has a bigger face for the club. New design or improvement? I can understand it is hard to make a "new" design for a golf club. From a distance, they do all look the same. Not so with a three-wheeled motorcycle or a three-headed hairdryer. If I name it something different, then does it not infringe? A tricycle is not a motorcycle, for example. A tri headed dryer is not the same as a hairdryer. I didn't say it was a three-wheeled MOTORCYCLE. I used a completely different name. I also did not call the other product a hairdryer.

Interesting. There have to be lines separating features as new designs or improvements on existing designs, or this nit-picking on features could go on forever.

You can file an improvement patent on an existing patent. The U.S. Patent Office grants patents for improvements as long as the innovation meets three criteria:

1. New
2. Useful
3. Not Obvious

The innovation must do any of the following:

add something to an already-established invention

change an aspect of the already-existing invention

incorporate new technologies into old products as in improvements or additions

introduce a new use for an existing invention

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Mark Trade]

To sum it up in a nutshell, the point of the patent search link, was to show you what has been invented and what has been improved upon.

The Patent Office (god bless their tiny warped minds) does not work the same as you and me. They are owned by a countries Govt. So regardless if you make a 3 wheel motorbike or a 12 wheel motorbike, it (1st) has to fall under a classification and then (2) a sub classification. 1st classification might be motorized vehicles, 2nd sub class would be motorbikes. There maybe more classes.

Same with the Hair Dryer, 1st class, then a 2nd, maybe a 3rd. 1st would be "Electrical Appliances", 2nd would be "Hair Dryers", 3rd would be "types of". Hell, there may even be a 4th class, Wall Mounted, Desk Mounted, Free Standing, Hand Held. Lets go 5th class, 240volt, 120 volt, 24 volt, 12 volt.

At the end of the day, the Hair Dryer has already been invented (1961) and the ferryman wants his royalties. So weather you put 12 vents or 3 shoots and a mirror on it, it's still a Hair Dryer. You have simply made an improvement. It's function is too dry hair. You could add a hair spray jet, so it could set the hair as well, but it's still a Hair Dryer.

There is nothing to stop you patenting an improvement, the only objection, will come from someone who has already done it and is waiting for a phonecall from Hair Dryer manufacturers, so he can get rich. Hence the attachment of the Brush, which I posted.

 

[Bertram]

To sum it up in a nutshell, the point of the patent search link, was to show you what has been invented and what has been improved upon.

The Patent Office (god bless their tiny warped minds) does not work the same as you and me. They are owned by a countries Govt. So regardless if you make a 3 wheel motorbike or a 12 wheel motorbike, it (1st) has to fall under a classification and then (2) a sub classification. 1st classification might be motorized vehicles, 2nd sub class would be motorbikes. There maybe more classes.

Same with the Hair Dryer, 1st class, then a 2nd, maybe a 3rd. 1st would be "Electrical Appliances", 2nd would be "Hair Dryers", 3rd would be "types of". Hell, there may even be a 4th class, Wall Mounted, Desk Mounted, Free Standing, Hand Held. Lets go 5th class, 240volt, 120 volt, 24 volt, 12 volt.

At the end of the day, the Hair Dryer has already been invented (1961) and the ferryman wants his royalties. So weather you put 12 vents or 3 shoots and a mirror on it, it's still a Hair Dryer. You have simply made an improvement. It's function is too dry hair. You could add a hair spray jet, so it could set the hair as well, but it's still a Hair Dryer.

There is nothing to stop you patenting an improvement, the only objection, will come from someone who has already done it and is waiting for a phonecall from Hair Dryer manufacturers, so he can get rich. Hence the attachment of the Brush, which I posted.

His safety net here is innovating something that wasn't obvious.
You're funny but you didn't give him an answer.
See #7.

 

[Mark Trade]

His safety net here is innovating something that wasn't obvious.
You're funny but you didn't give him an answer.
See #7.

Everything that he has described is obvious, regardless, of it has 1 outlet or he wants to design / construct / improve or add 100 outlets, it still emits hot air and dries someones hair. It's a Hair Dryer.!!!! It has to fall under a classification and the Patent Office will classify it as Hair Dryer. End of Story.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Bertram]

k

Everything that he has described is obvious, regardless, of it has 1 outlet or he wants to design / construct / improve or add 100 outlets, it still emits hot air and dries someones hair. It's a Hair Dryer.!!!! It has to fall under a classification and the Patent Office will classify it as Hair Dryer. End of Story.

Are you really a patent agent?
No insult intended.
I realize you're not online here to hand out professional services.
But a U.S. agent would hint at the work-arounds for its classification, not just say end of story.
I agree the innovations discussed here are pretty painstakingly obvious. She needs something inobvious and surprising.

 

[Real Deal Denver]

His safety net here is innovating something that wasn't obvious.
You're funny but you didn't give him an answer.
See #7.

Glad you noticed that.

My take on this so far is that no matter how fantastic my invention is, I can get sidestepped and pushed out of the picture.

One of my inventions involves making a manual device electric. For example - electric scissors. So the next guy comes along and changes my ELECTRIC SCISSORS to have a better control handle. I get nothing, but the guy that invented scissors does (Yes, I know electric scissors exist - this is just an example for discussion's sake).

I don't see any advantage to patenting my device then because it is not the fundamental basic design, even though it went through massive design changes by going from manual to electric? Not to mention the guy that made the push-button momentary switch that turns it on and off...

As I said earlier, there are twenty different ways to circumvent and change my design in whatever I make. And I get pushed out of every one of them it looks like.

In all my patent and/or inventing books, this "dark side" of inventing is never discussed.

 

[Real Deal Denver]

add something to an already-established invention

change an aspect of the already-existing invention

incorporate new technologies into old products as in improvements or additions

My electric version of a manual device GREATLY changes its market appeal and usefulness.

Let's take the example of electric scissors. Would every generation of electric scissors be a variation of MY design, or would it revert to the original scissors patent?

I'm thinking of a car versus a horse-drawn carriage. They are both four-wheeled vehicles, so actually a car would be an improvement on a carriage? I'm putting aside the time constraints which would cancel out the carriage patent - for argument's sake.

To me this is ridiculous. Everything can be traced back if we use this logic. TVs and computers are an improvement over static pictures on paper - they are both images. Perhaps a much better one would be an electronic calculator being an improvement over a manual adding machine! Do you see my logic path?

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Mark Trade]

k

Are you really a patent agent?
No insult intended.
I realize you're not online here to hand out professional services.
But a U.S. agent would hint at work-arounds, not just say end of story.
I agree the innovations discussed here are pretty painstakingly obvious. She needs something inobvious and surprising.

(1) I have never said, I was a Patent Agent. I deal in Patents and Trademarks.
(2) I have mentioned many work-arounds and hints.
(3) End of Story is correct, at the end of the day, it's a Hair Dryer. Reality.!!!

If he had been the first person to come up with this idea, for a Hair Dryer, then yes it would be a new invention and not obvious to any Patent Office. Now unless, he can invent a time machine, perhaps out of an old De-Lorean and go back to 1961, then all he can really offer now (2019) are improvements.

Even if he comes up with a solar powered Hair Dryer to dry hair, it's still classed as a Hair Dryer. If it sold 1000's, he would get royalties, as would the original inventor of the Hairdryer "and" everyone who invested parts in his Solar Hair Dryer.

 

[Bertram]

Glad you noticed that.

My take on this so far is that no matter how fantastic my invention is, I can get sidestepped and pushed out of the picture.

One of my inventions involves making a manual device electric. For example - electric scissors. So the next guy comes along and changes my ELECTRIC SCISSORS to have a better control handle. I get nothing, but the guy that invented scissors does (Yes, I know electric scissors exist - this is just an example for discussion's sake).

I don't see any advantage to patenting my device then because it is not the fundamental basic design, even though it went through massive design changes by going from manual to electric? Not to mention the guy that made the push-button momentary switch that turns it on and off...

As I said earlier, there are twenty different ways to circumvent and change my design in whatever I make. And I get pushed out of every one of them it looks like.

In all my patent and/or inventing books, this "dark side" of inventing is never discussed.

I don't think these books can in any way provide entire answers to your questions. The reason is that professionally licensed pattent agent-authors would be open to lawsuits. You really need to contact a (good, ethical) patent agent. They do provide free consultations while vetting you.
A good agent will develop a patent application that is bomb proof against usurpers and copycats. If you've pored through dozens of books there's nothing more to learn here.
PM if you want a lead for of an excellent, dilligent agent. He's in the Phoenix area.
I hope you get your patents.

 

[Mark Trade]

Glad you noticed that.

My take on this so far is that no matter how fantastic my invention is, I can get sidestepped and pushed out of the picture.

One of my inventions involves making a manual device electric. For example - electric scissors. So the next guy comes along and changes my ELECTRIC SCISSORS to have a better control handle. I get nothing, but the guy that invented scissors does (Yes, I know electric scissors exist - this is just an example for discussion's sake).

I don't see any advantage to patenting my device then because it is not the fundamental basic design, even though it went through massive design changes by going from manual to electric? Not to mention the guy that made the push-button momentary switch that turns it on and off...

As I said earlier, there are twenty different ways to circumvent and change my design in whatever I make. And I get pushed out of every one of them it looks like.

In all my patent and/or inventing books, this "dark side" of inventing is never discussed.

Lets say, you patent a pair of Electric Scissors and someone comes along and makes an improvement. You don't get pushed out of the way, you still get payments, because you invented the scissors to begin with.

I then come along and change the colour of the handles from red to green and add rubber grooves. You still get paid, so does the guy who made the first improvement and so do I.

Your pair of Electric Scissors can be manufactured under many Patent Numbers. Hell the Motor Car is manufactured under a 1000 different patents.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Bertram]

My electric version of a manual device GREATLY changes its market appeal and usefulness.

Let's take the example of electric scissors. Would every generation of electric scissors be a variation of MY design, or would it revert to the original scissors patent?

I'm thinking of a car versus a horse-drawn carriage. They are both four-wheeled vehicles, so actually a car would be an improvement on a carriage? I'm putting aside the time constraints which would cancel out the carriage patent - for argument's sake.

To me this is ridiculous. Everything can be traced back if we use this logic. TVs and computers are an improvement over static pictures on paper - they are both images. Perhaps a much better one would be an electronic calculator being an improvement over a manual adding machine! Do you see my logic path?

I think so. It seems you're massively over-thinking this question. The defensibility will come down to not so much classification, as Mr. Trademark postulates, but rather upon prior art. The patent search is quite subtle, however, which is which I really encourage you to contact an expert who will discuss your invention in complete confidentiality. U.S. patent laws give great protection to the inventor, provided the invention or innovation is legitimate. And that depends upon the strength of the patent search and the arguments within the application. It never, ever depends upon what "someone" happens to be doing with manufacturing licenses simultaneous to your filings.

 

[Real Deal Denver]

If you've pored through dozens of books there's nothing more to learn here.

Actually, there is much to learn here.

I have heard that the guy that invented the weed trimmer using fishline never made a dime from his invention. It was reengineered multiple ways and thereby stolen from him.

I've searched for that story, but can't find anything pertaining to it.

Then, on the other hand, is the guy that invented variable-speed windshield wipers for cars. They made a movie out of that, which really thrilled me to death! I would definitely say that was an improvement - so that runs counter to him being able to patent it and make a lot of money - but he did exactly that.

So this thread is kind of filling in the holes - but not as completely as I would have hoped. Yet, it is still very interesting and thought-provoking. Too bad there is a counterpoint for every point. I wish things were more clear. Nevertheless, everything stated is appreciated very much!

 

[Bertram]

,

I'm thinking of a car versus a horse-drawn carriage. They are both four-wheeled vehicles, so actually a car would be an improvement on a carriage? I'm putting aside the time constraints which would cancel out the carriage patent - for argument's sake.

To me this is ridiculous. Everything can be traced back if we use this logic. TVs and computers are an improvement over static pictures on paper - they are both images. Perhaps a much better one would be an electronic calculator being an improvement over a manual adding machine! Do you see my logic path?

Of course not.
I can't understand how you would envision this dilemma if you read even one book on patents. You must have a very strong creative process.
I have an idea. Use Google.Patent and look up the first automobile patents. Maybe post the link here for others as well.
Reading a bunch of genuine, successful patent applications will really be illuminating, I promise!
As a proposal writer for various inventors over the years I got a kick out of doing patent searches and researching prior art (a different search process and a different aspect of the patent application).
Have you done a patent search on your ersatz mechanical scissors? At Google.Patent you can do a keyword search with, for example, scissors and electric. There will be a variety of classifications for these. You see, there can be many names for things that are all essentially in one conceptual category.

I do think a patent agent will help you the most here.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Mark Trade]

Actually, there is much to learn here.

I have heard that the guy that invented the weed trimmer using fishline never made a dime from his invention. It was reengineered multiple ways and thereby stolen from him.

I've searched for that story, but can't find anything pertaining to it.

Then, on the other hand, is the guy that invented variable-speed windshield wipers for cars. They made a movie out of that, which really thrilled me to death! I would definitely say that was an improvement - so that runs counter to him being able to patent it and make a lot of money - but he did exactly that.

So this thread is kind of filling in the holes - but not as completely as I would have hoped. Yet, it is still very interesting and thought-provoking. Too bad there is a counterpoint for every point. I wish things were more clear. Nevertheless, everything stated is appreciated very much!

Here's a thought, if you are convinced, you have something worthwhile and I hope you do, then consult a Patent Attorney, get his blessing and file an application, based on his recommendation. Then wait and see what the objections are from those holding Hair Dryer patents and what the Patent Office has too say itself..

Otherwise your just going to keep coming up with workarounds to convince yourself, you really shouldn't file an application. Good luck.

 

[Bertram]

Actually, there is much to learn here.

I have heard that the guy that invented the weed trimmer using fishline never made a dime from his invention. It was reengineered multiple ways and thereby stolen from him.

I've searched for that story, but can't find anything pertaining to it.

Then, on the other hand, is the guy that invented variable-speed windshield wipers for cars. They made a movie out of that, which really thrilled me to death! I would definitely say that was an improvement - so that runs counter to him being able to patent it and make a lot of money - but he did exactly that.

So this thread is kind of filling in the holes - but not as completely as I would have hoped. Yet, it is still very interesting and thought-provoking. Too bad there is a counterpoint for every point. I wish things were more clear. Nevertheless, everything stated is appreciated very much!

If that invention was stolen it was the result of a faulty patent. Not the result of an invention that could be copied coming to the attention of thieves.

 

[Bertram]

Then, on the other hand, is the guy that invented variable-speed windshield wipers for cars. They made a movie out of that, which really thrilled me to death! I would definitely say that was an improvement - so that runs counter to him being able to patent it and make a lot of money - but he did exactly that.

!!!
Emphasis added by me.
Of course he made money.
I don't think my content, above, convinced you.
Patent innovations are protected patents just like outright inventions. Of course money is made from innovations.
Also look at electric v. hand crank coffee grinders. Braun and Cuisinart didn't have to contact some Old World manufacturer. Commodore and WordPerfect didn't have to get in touch with Remington typewriters.
It really seems you're overthinking the problem.
I hope these responses were helpful, if not merely conversational.
Good luck with your patents. It will be fun to hear about them sometime.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Real Deal Denver]

,

Of course not.
I can't understand how you would envision this dilemma if you read even one book on patents.
I have an idea. Use Google.Patent and look up the first automobile patents. Maybe post the link here for others as well.
Reading a bunch of genuine, successful patent applications will really be illuminating, I promise!
As a grant writer for various inventors over the years I got a kick out of doing patent searches and researching prior art (a different search process and a different aspect of the patent application).
Have you done a patent search on your ersatz mechanical scissors? At Google.Patent you can do a keyword search with, for example, scissors and electric. There will be a variety of classifications for these. You see, there can be many names for things that are all essentially in one conceptual category.

I do think a patent agent will help you the most here.

Great points and have NO doubt that they are solid gold to me. I have done a detailed patent search. My product would be the first "electrified" version of it. I have also learned a lot about patent facts - in fact, I have books that discuss only that aspect.

I also know inventors. One of my very good friends has an invention that is in production and about to go IPO worldwide. He is already a millionaire, but will really hit it big when that happens. His invention is a greatly improved industrial battery - and his target market is cars.

He and his company have over 30 patents on a battery! My invention has many more parts than a battery does, and also appeals to a much larger customer base.

So I have to be careful. Rather than get kicked in the head by something or someone that I was not expecting - I am trying to find the pitfalls to avoid before I step into the jungle. Sadly, I can trust no one. I don't trust a patent attorney - and not even the manufacturer. Anyone can make a deal with someone they know that's out of the picture once my idea is revealed and take a cut under the table.

My weakness is I'm too smart. As funny or arrogant as that may sound, I can figure out how to screw me if I wanted to. And if I can figure it out, so can someone else.

If things go right, this may be on the market within 6 months. I wanted my millionaire friend to run with it, but he wants to cash in and take it easy. I need a big gun that has done this - and then I will partner with them in some way and not be scared some other big gun is going to take it and run - which happens all the time. There are "bandits" out there that do exactly that - and as far as I know, they can't be stopped without me suing them, and that takes a ton of money and time.

The dilemma. Still investigating...

EDIT - I am leaning heavily towards licensing, however, my cut would be minuscule. I have books on licensing too, and they project from 6 to 15% as being typical. Toys can go up to 20% or so. I thinking more along the lines of 40 to 60%, so you see we are worlds apart.

 

[Bertram]

Here's a thought, if you are convinced, you have something worthwhile and I hope you do, then consult a Patent Attorney, get his blessing and file an application, based on his recommendation. Then wait and see what the objections are from those holding Hair Dryer patents and what the Patent Office has too say itself..

Otherwise your just going to keep coming up with workarounds to convince yourself, you really shouldn't file an application. Good luck.

Emphasis added by me.
This process does not actually resemble the U.S. patent application process. There's no question here that the Aus and U.S. systems and theory are different.
@Mark Trade have you heard about the patent for three-legged panty-hose?
No, there's no punch line, this is a real thing.

 

[Mark Trade]

Emphasis added by me.
This process does not actually resemble the actual U.S. patent application process. There's no question here that the Australian and U.S. systems and theory are very different.
@Mark Trade have you heard about the patent for three-legged panty-hose?
No, there's no punch line, this is a real thing.
Thi

I have no doubt, there is a difference, between Aus and the US, even obtaining Copyright for a Book, in the US, was an effort in itself. Drama after drama. I have also seen some strange Patents in my time, so 3 legged panty-hose is no surprise.

It does sound like the process here is quicker than the US. We simply fill out an application, present it, it's time stamped and then the fun begins . After the specified time, (if there's no objections) you are granted the Patent. Bingo.!!

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Bertram]

Great points and have NO doubt that they are solid gold to me. I have done a detailed patent search. My product would be the first "electrified" version of it. I have also learned a lot about patent facts - in fact, I have books that discuss only that aspect.

I also know inventors. One of my very good friends has an invention that is in production and about to go IPO worldwide. He is already a millionaire, but will really hit it big when that happens. His invention is a greatly improved industrial battery - and his target market is cars.

He and his company have over 30 patents on a battery! My invention has many more parts than a battery does, and also appeals to a much larger customer base.

So I have to be careful. Rather than get kicked in the head by something or someone that I was not expecting - I am trying to find the pitfalls to avoid before I step into the jungle. Sadly, I can trust no one. I don't trust a patent attorney - and not even the manufacturer. Anyone can make a deal with someone they know that's out of the picture once my idea is revealed and take a cut under the table.

My weakness is I'm too smart. As funny or arrogant as that may sound, I can figure out how to screw me if I wanted to. And if I can figure it out, so can someone else.

If things go right, this may be on the market within 6 months. I wanted my millionaire friend to run with it, but he wants to cash in and take it easy. I need a big gun that has done this - and then I will partner with them in some way and not be scared some other big gun is going to take it and run - which happens all the time. There are "bandits" out there that do exactly that - and as far as I know, they can't be stopped without me suing them, and that takes a ton of money and time.

The dilemma. Still investigating...

EDIT - I am leaning heavily towards licensing, however, my cut would be minuscule. I have books on licensing too, and they project from 6 to 15% as being typical. Toys can go up to 20% or so. I thinking more along the lines of 40 to 60%, so you see we are worlds apart.

All due respect, if you think no one on earth is to be trusted then you are living in your own imagination.
Einstein was a patent clerk.
Do you think your invention would have been safe with Einstein?

Would Einstein himself have been too weak to resist stealing your idea?

I can recommend a good patent agent.
I look forward to hearing more.