Patents > Patent/Invention Ownership
Individual threatening to patent invention co-developed on public forum
JustSomeDude:
A device was developed amongst a group of hobbyists on a web forum over about a years time. It was a collaborative project with a few people taking the lead. I was an informal leader on the project. We were really just developing it for our own purposes as hobbyists. One of the guys has the ability to produce them for everyone else's use and is doing so now.
He recently heard through the grapevine that an individual who was not involved in the original design is attempting to file a patent using the design and the details located on the public forum. We are concerned that this individual has a vested interest in burying this invention so it doesn't hurt his current competing products.
What recourse do we have? Should we just beat him to the punch and file ourselves? If we do get a patent, can we setup a license similar to Creative Commons but specific to patents? We'd like it patented, but we want to allow mildly restricted use. We primarily want attribution when produced commercially.
Thanks.
JimIvey:
If the other guy really got the idea from the web site, he shouldn't be able to patent the idea. However, unless the examiner finds that particular prior art, he might get a patent that will have to be proven invalid in court.
Because of the on line description of the idea as it was developed, it's highly unlikely that the group would be able to get a patent on the idea either -- however with the same caveat about getting through the patent office.
It you want to be free to continue with your project, keep records of the public discussion of the ideas as proof of invalidity of any patent that might issue on the patent -- Print to PDF works really well for that.
If you really want to scuttle attempts by the other guy to get the patent, there are strategies for that -- it all comes down to mechanisms by which a third party (not the application or the Patent Office) can force consideration of material information by the examiner.
When all is said and done, it's highly unlikely that any patent coming out of this would be enforced against small-time use of the idea -- patent litigation can cost millions of dollars; generally not worth it is the reasonable royalty would only be a few hundred bucks.
As for attribtution, I don't see you getting that without filing your own application (although there may be copyright in the forum posts).
Regards.
JustSomeDude:
Thanks for the reply.
So what you are saying is that because the design is on the web in a public place it is not possible to patent anyone? Am I correct in assuming it is in the public domain?
A friend suggested we file a provisional application. I see your signatures says not to allow friends to file provisional applications. How come?
Dazed-n-confused:
--- Quote from: JustSomeDude on 10-05-11 at 06:36 pm ---
So what you are saying is that because the design is on the web in a public place it is not possible to patent anyone? Am I correct in assuming it is in the public domain?
A friend suggested we file a provisional application. I see your signatures says not to allow friends to file provisional applications. How come?
--- End quote ---
If you disclose a thing publicly, that starts a clock running. Under U.S. law, if you disclosed a thing publicly over a year ago without having yet having filed a patent application, you have then devoted the inventive concepts you disclosed to the public domain. So neither you nor the rip-off artist can *properly* get a patent if it's been more than a year disclosed.
Some considerations:
This sounds like a "heard from a dude who heard from a dude that so-n-so is gonna..." kind of deal. Before you get too up in arms, and in particular before you spend efforts & money, how reliable is the intel?
Above the word *properly* is highlighted. If you want to rely on the idea that the info is > 1 year web published (assuming that's the case), how reliably could you prove when it actually was published?
Also, note that it's entirely possible that the dude planning to file the patent application is planning to file on something that is an inspired (inventive) modification of what you and friends have published, rather than being exactly what you have published. There's no prohibition from his doing so.
Note this discussion only relates to patent laws, and does not apply at all to any possible copyrightable aspects to the writings disclosing the same thing.
For JimIvey's biases against how many people try to utilize provisional apps, assuming he doesn't swing back around in time, just use the main search page against his user ID name and the word "provisional". As I understand it, his problem with provisionals isn't per se against the idea of provisionals, but rather that, although they can be an effective tool if properly written, many (MANY) people use them as short-cuts, in which case they are not really that properly written effective tool.
JustSomeDude:
We are still under a year as far as when the design was finalized. We started discussions over a year ago. If it is under a year, we could still patent it? Even if this other party's intentions aren't real, it might still be worth it to us to have it patented.
Thanks for the help.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version