From the United States Patent and Trademark Office

•Provisional Patent Application - www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/provapp.htm
•Registered Patent Practitioners - http://des.uspto.gov/OEDCI/GeoRegion.jsp
•Patent Information - http://www.uspto.gov/main/patents.htm
•Depository Libraries – www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/ptdl/index.html
•Independent Inventor Program - www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/iip/index.htm
•General Information - www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/
•Web Patent Database - http://patents.uspto.gov/

Copyright and Trademark Information

•From the US Patent and Trademark Office - www.uspto.gov/main/trademarks.htm
•For Trademark information - www.inventored.org/trademark/
•For Copyright information - http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/
•Franklin Pierce Law Center, US Patent, Trademark and Copyright Information - www.fplc.edu/tfield/ipbasics.htm

Invention Evaluation

•UIA Innovation Assessment Program - http://www.uiausa.org/Default.aspx?page=129
•US Dep’t of Energy’s Inventions & Innovations Program - http://www1.eere.energy.gov/inventions/
•Washington Innovation Assessment Center - http://www.business.wsu.edu/iac
•Wisconsin Innovation Services Center - http://academics.uww.edu/business/innovate/default.htm

Patent Related Information

•United States Patent and Trademark Office - http://www.uspto.gov
•Patent & Trademark Depository Libraries - http://www.uspto.gov/go/ptdl
•National Patent Association - http://www.nationalpatent.com
•National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts - http://www.nesta.org.uk/withflash.html
•Franklin Pierce Law Center, US Patent, Trademark and Copyright Information - www.fplc.edu/tfield/ipbasics.htm

Funding Sources

•Energy TechNet - http://www.energytechnet.com
•National Science Foundation - http://www.nsf.gov
•FinanceNet - http://www.financenet.gov
•SBA Procurements and Grants Hot List - http://www.sbaonline.sba.gov/hotlist/procure.html
•Small Business Innovation Research Program - http://www.sba.gov/SBIR
•National Institutes of Health Grants & Funding Opportunities - http://grants.nih.gov/grants/index.cfm

Help for Inventors

•Center for Design & Business - www.centerdesignbusiness.org
•R.R. Enterprises, Inc. - http://www.rjriley.com
•InventNET: The Inventors Network - http://www.inventnet.com
•Energy TechNet - http://www.energytechnet.com

Marketing and Licensing

•Small Business Administration - http://www.sbaonline.sba.gov/starting/businessplan.html
•Licensing Executives Society - www.usa-canada.les.org
•Ed Zimmer’s Entrepreneur Network - http://tenonline.org/index.html
•Licensing Consultants and Brokers Directory - http://www.usa-canada.les.org/consultants/directory.asp

Legal

•Cornell Law School - http://www.law.cornell.edu
•Franklin Pierce Law Center - http://www.fplc.edu

Manufacturing

•ThomasNet - www.thomasregister.com

Inventions are a labor of love for their creators. But more often than not they attach a greater value to their inventions than they really deserve. This is only the first handicap when it comes to finding prospects for their inventions. Inventors are basically…inventors, what else? They are not salesmen, just the way salesmen are not inventors. So when it comes to selling it isn’t a wonder that most inventors lose their way and give up or end up with a bad deal. This is where an Invention Marketing Agent (IMA) comes in; they bring together the right combination of inventor and licensee together and work out a deal which is fair to both parties and legally applicable.

Inventors would do a better job of finding the right IMA if they understand how they go about their work. IMAs charge what appears to be a shockingly high 20% to 50% of the royalties that inventors get; the reason behind this is that they have to work very hard for the inventors. Their work includes traveling and meeting people which is expensive and time consuming. Inventions are sold on the basis of their perceived potential and they may succeed as well as fail, so licensees usually do not offer any advance on royalties. If the product is successful then the money may take as long as two or more years to flow in on the other hand so many inventions fail due to various reasons. All this puts an IMA in a position very similar to the inventor where he is investing huge amount of time and effort for profits which may or may not come, so he makes sure that whatever invention yields profits makes up for his investment as well as losses from other ventures.

Most IMAs turn down majority of inventions because they may have their own preferences or they believe that the invention may not have enough potential in the market. Some IMAs may charge an upfront amount to handle the invention but unless there is a way of knowing the credentials of such people its better to avoid them.

There are firms that advertise in various magazines and make glorious promises to make you rich; but the best way to deal with them is to avoid them! Because they just lure in inventors with their fake promises, and keeping draining money from them on one pretext or another.

A good way of measuring up the potential of an IMA is to know that what percentage of the inventors they are approached by they actually take in as clients. The more fussy ones are generally the ones to go for, they would take in the cases they are confident about and not make empty promises. If you can get references of satisfied clients from IMAs that would be a very good indicator and the good IMAs should not have any problems giving that out.

Inventors’ Digest magazine and the Professional Members listings on the United Inventors Association web site at www.uiausa.org are the best places for finding and checking out IMAs.

Welcome to the third installment of the ongoing debate with US patent legislation. An analogous version of the proposed Patent Reform Act of 2007 has already been approved in the House and will be on the agenda for a vote in the Senate within a few months. This particular debate is basically between two opposing parties with individual interests at heart. According to the large companies this bill will clearly demarcate between willful contravention and cases in which infringement is not premeditated. It will further stipulate suitable action for each and every case. On the other side the technology licensing companies and the independent inventors believe that the act will bound patent holder’s privileges and suppress innovation.

The proposed bill will also be an enormous giveaway of American technical knowledge and expertise. The reformed patent act will make it obligatory for the U.S. patent office to make online the particulars of all inventions after 18 months of the date of application. As we all are well aware of the fact that it takes quite a long time for a patent to be granted. Therefore the actual winner of this provision will be the infringers, who can easily steal the inventions over the internet.

Apart from encouraging infringement the US Patent Reform Act of 2007 will also make it economical for infringers to file patented inventions by edging damages to the patent’s specific input over the particular part of the innovation that has been stolen. This will result in lower damages awards while increasing the litigation costs. In most cases damages are the only mean of remedy accessible to a small inventor. With this provision the reformed patent act will diminish the significance of patent property rights. It will even demoralize the ability of small companies and independent inventors to repulse large infringers.

Once the bill is approved it will further make it trouble-free for patent infringers to nullify a patent anytime even after it is issued. Hence the reformed patent act makes the inventor’s intellectual property rights vulnerable and trims down their ability to fetch venture capital. Thereby this particular bill is a big threat on the legitimate property rights of independent inventors and small firms.

With the reformed patent act of US can you protect your invention from the copy cats? Even if you can how justified would it be? Apart from the debate of First-to-Invent vs. First-to-File, the US patent legislation has also stimulated certain other controversial issues. It has been suspected that the bill might amend the way courts assign compensation when an organization is caught to violate a patent. At present, courts usually consider the cost of the whole invention even if a small part of the product contravenes a patent. However certain large companies and other ally’s of the proposed bill would like Congress to charge indemnity only on the price of the infringing part. This in turn may actually promote infringement.

Another major problem in this bill is that it calls for a new approach of challenging patents once they’re issued. This procedure is known as post-grant review. The proposed bill would even allow companies sued for patent contravention to defy the case in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). This post-grant review would generate an enduring query about whether the patent was valid. This would obviously make it difficult for small companies and independent inventors to get funding. Although some have overblown the worry about the post-grant review, there are also other ways to confront patents.

Earlier the US system created a significant amount of burden on inventors to document their concepts and their actions and interpretation supporting the invention. However, the first-to-file approach of the Senate’s Patent Reform Act of 2007 will reduce several complex litigation intended to ascertain when concepts were invented. This simplifies a path to universal patent synchronization. Shifting to a first-to-file system would not only abolish the necessity to document experimental facts and original ideas, simultaneously it would diminish the burden on independent inventors by eradicating certain governmental errands, which serve just to meet contemporary US patent obligations.

The strategy of first-to-file creates another controversy regarding the patent life. Effectual patent life is measured by the date of patent filing, the time period between filing and launching the final product, and the time of general access into the market. There is comparatively a long gap between preliminary discovery of a potential invention and its apprehension as a product. With the earlier strategy of First-to-Invent under the U.S. patent system, companies were able to get the most out of the effective patent life by waiting to file their first patent applications, while shielding themselves by documenting the concepts.

The great ongoing debate of US patent legislation is surely First-to-Invent vs. First-to-File. As an inventor you can no longer appeal the US patent legislation, if some one else submits the paperwork. Patents are the most important phase of inventing. They allow the inventors a monopoly to trade their unique invention. Though the proposed Patent Reform Act of US will not hinder the companies much, the inventors are at a real threat from copy-cats. In fact the companies brawling expensive patent cases are now hoping that the reformed US patent will condense lawsuits. It has actually upshot the indignation of independent inventors.

If you are manufacturing and selling your invention yourself then this bill will make it more intricate to seek court orders against alleged intrusion. In order words this may encourage misdemeanor by gratifying intellectual piracy. Hence this will deject the small scale enterprises and various independent inventors also by increasing the costs, and making the invention process available only to reputed and well-funded organizations with internal patent factories.

The call for the patent reform act of US will also allow large companies to continuously challenge genuine patents and patent applications. The bill may now protect companies with the ways to rush to file their paper works first over small independent inventors who actually come up with the concept. This in turn might make it unjustly complicated for independent patent-holders to trail legitimate proceedings against companies stealing their inventions.

As a result the large scale high-tech companies may use this bill to crush small independent inventors who come across their way. They may now insist that most inventors are actually businessmen who basically want to be able to defend their intellectual property.

The Patent Reform Act of US also sometime called as Smith’s bill essentially requires that the independent inventors and small scale business should submit their paperwork for the patent as soon as possible.

Michael Neustel, spoke to us about the importance of the North Plains Inventors Congress. Mr. Neustel is also the organizer of the event, a patent attorney, and an inventor himself.

If you haven’t heard of the google patent search tool, then hop aboard the google train.

Like many of google’s products such as search, photo sharing, and advertising, they make patent searches a cinch. Also, the search function is faster and quicker to use than the US Patent & Trademark Office patent search utility. You can easily view drawings with google whereas the USPTO site makes it more challenging. With google you can even download patents as a PDF to save the most relevant ones.

Notwithstanding all the pro’s of using the google patent search, there is one major drawback that has been voices by none other than patent office Commissioner John Doll. His concern with the google utility was that it did pull up the same results consistently, which is important when you are trying to make sure you conduct a thorough search. If the search for the same word turn up different results, how sure can you be that you’re not missing anything?

If nothing else, the google patent search tool is a great way to get started doing your own patent searches, although it might be recommended you use it in combination with the USPTO tool. Happy searching!

One of the most common questions I am asked is what does the overall process look like from concept to market? I’m sure it is different for different people in various industries, but for me, as a licensor, it generally looks like this:
1. Idea
2. Quick patent search
3. Rough working model, sometimes I start with sketches, it depends on how hard it is to make.
4. When I am pretty sure I have the concept down I do one more patent search based on what I want to make
5. General market research:
a. What would it cost to make
b. What would it cost to bring to market
c. What would people be wiling to pay for it
6. If the numbers are profitable, I file the patent. If not, I may reinvent it or just abandon it if it is not worth it.
7. Once it is patent pending, I begin contacting companies with a “One Sheet” to license.

Happy Inventing!

Lisa Lloyd

If you missed the Colorado Inventor Showcase this year, hosted by the Da Vinci institute, don’t miss it next year. Although it was a relatively small event with 30 exhibitors, many of the judges were venture capitalists, bankers, product development companies, and entrepreneurs roaming the halls. In fact, their were 45 judges. Has anyone ever seen more judges than participants?! It spelled only good news for the exhibiting inventors.

They also had some speakers for the Inventor Boot Camp in the morning. Speakers included an attorney that specializes in licensing, John Funk from Evergreen IP licensing firm, and the keynote speaker of the evening, US Patent Office Commissioner, John Doll. We recorded Commissioner Doll’s keynote speech and you can listed to it in our Education section, under Audio Downloads.

Here are some notes from John Doll’s first speech (not the keynote):

• [attorneys cover ears] Inventors don’t need a lawyer because the USPTO is trying to make the patent process easier
• 95% of patents never sell a single item (one of the reasons we stress testing the marketability of an invention)
• Design patents, although often used by scam companies to give inventors a false sense of protection, can actually be used wisely. Here are some companies that use design patents: Nike on their shoes, Corvette’s bumper
• To avoid getting ripped off by scams, check references. Patent office actually gives an accused company a chance to defend themselves, but they rarely response to written inquiries.
• Public disclosure before patent application - don’t worry so much about telling your neighbors or family about your invention. It’s very unlikely it will backfire and void your patent. Instead, worry about disclosing your invention at trade shows and in publications. He made a joke that even when he tries to help some inventors, they refuse to tell him their product for this unreasonable fear. They’re afraid to tell the US Patent Commissioner, a government employee trying to help!
• Says google patent search okay, but gives inconsistent results compared to USPTO patent search.
• You can patent a use of a product. For example, Rogaine started out as a medicine to reduce blood pressure, but another person got a patent on its ability to grow hair on bald heads. Bald men of the world rejoice
• Future changes at the Patent office: more congressional oversight, peer to patent public reviews of prior art, talking to industry leaders about what they want, encouraged sharing between various patent offices in Europe, Canada, Japan, etc.

Those are the highlights. Be sure to listen to Commissioner Doll’s, at times humorous, keynote speech. You can also listen to the Invention Contest Winners on StartupStory.com.

Bryan Daigle

Just in the last month, I’ve discovered a TV show that is gaining some traction. The show is educational for inventors, entrepreneurs, AND average joe couch potatoes. It’s funny how the spoken word seems to travel like wildfire sometimes. I’d never heard of this show, and then in the last month, I’ve had no less than five friends and acquaintances tell me about the show. Okay, okay, I’ll divulge the name of the show. If you haven’t figured out the name of the show from the title of this blog post, then you probably haven’t heard of it.
The name of the show is The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch at it airs on CNBC weekdays at midnight CST (10pm PST/1am EST). I’m not quite sure why it airs so late, since it seems to be THE most popular program on CNBC - at least based on my informal poll of my friends.
But the best part is, you get 5 nights a week with this guy. Some nights he’ll talk about bootstrapping, other nights about a successful inventor, other nights with a CEO on his thoughts about the future. Anyway, for those of you who don’t have cable, or refuse to get cable (like me), you can find the occasional episodes on youtube, or on the CNBC web site.
As with many things, us idea people always have to keep learning, getting insight from others, and keeping up with the trends. So think of this show as an entertaining education.

Bryan Daigle