Why You Should NOT Get a Patent!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 янв 2025
- Let's talk about why you should NOT get a patent, what patents are, and other intellectual property buzzwords and laws that you should know as an entrepreneur!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Links for this video
Thanks to Ty Kendrick for joining us! Ty can be reached at:
kern-kendrick.com/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Reach us / CNC Info:
Speeds & Feeds: provencut.com
Download Fusion 360: www.dpbolvw.ne...
Online Fusion 360 Training: bit.ly/LearnFus...
Hands-On CNC Classes: www.nyccnc.com...
SMW Products: saundersmachin...
CNC Resources: www.nyccnc.com
Music copyrighted by John Saunders 5 Reasons to Use a Fixture Plate on Your CNC Machine: bit.ly/3sNA4uH
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Three minutes into this video and you've completely nailed it. 0:00-3:00 was my exact experience. It completely depends on everyone's exact scenario, but this seems to be very common in the machining and fabrication field.
I guess times have changed. Years ago, a friend's father, a machine shop owner in New York, invented and patented several tools for making men's hats. A large company infringed on his patents, and he won a judgement. The offending company had to not only pay him a substantial compensation, but also had to relinquish all of their inventory and spare parts. With all of this, my friend's dad had enough products on hand that he never had to make anymore himself.
carver3419 interesting,.. how long ago was that?
carver3419 - Happens every day (literally.) My firm won $2.8B this year alone.
"interesting,.. how long ago was that?"
I dropped in to the old man's machine shop on Bleeker Street in NYC in the early 1960s. He told me the story - and showed me some of the tools he invented. I was later told that during WWII he couldn't get enough materiel to run his shop full time, so he opened a hat factory on Canal Street during the war. I assumed the suit was in the '50s, but my friend has died and I have no way to check.
Well these days you just need expensive enough lawyers, someone who can match the corporate expenses. For the individual this just doesn't work out, especially when infringing companies learn how to make an almost copy which can't be exactly matched so it is down to who makes their argument better.
These days, it's hundreds of Chinese factories that will infringe on your patents and they don't give AF about US-based litigation. NYC CNC is completely correct with his video.
Great video John. My team went through the actions of a patent to find out what you did. Also we have since discovered that some of our friends in Asia do not care about the patent at all and they will be happy to copy your idea for their profits!
Mostly china 😂
@@Karonclip Ironically, Apple is notorious for lawfare against competitors over petty visual distinctions such as icons for apps having rounded edges justifying a trademark or something.. some poetic justice being Apple being sued for design theft from Chinese company who ironically stole their design from Apple insider spies. SMH LOL
"It's all about execution."
So I should hire a hitman to take out patent infringers. Fair enough. :D
I made a lot of money licensing many patents. Simple I would have not made a dollar without it. This a joke.
Haha will cost less!
@@chihuynh4204 exactly, you make money by being a predator to a guy that is being picked at like a whale in a pond full of piranha
of they sold my design and claimed it themselves by trading my brain yes
Hire a hitman to take out patent infringers?
I think there's a patent on that process.
6 years later…still an amazing video! Not only giving your side but bringing a professional to rebuttal! Excellent👏🏼
John keep putting out vids on business. I went to law school. Not to be a lawyer to be a more informed business professional. You get paid on what you know not on what you don't know. The topic of patents you and I are the only ones I have come across that actually know it really doesn't matter. With the exception if you want to sell the company and the buyer wants that protection.
Excellent video. You are definitely setting yourself apart. Keep it going.
Will from Akron, Ohio
I just filed for my first preliminary patent. I think all inventors should at least go through the process. I learned a ton, and not just about what I invented and the law. Sure, I may not be able to defend it if a Fortune 500 company infringes on it, but having a legal justification which proves I am an inventor is a positive professional discriminator, and opens up new opportunities and resources. A patent also shows that no only are you innovative and can find novel solutions to relevant and complex problems, but that you have the work ethic and drive to document what you've worked hard to design. If all you see is what things cost, you may want to take a look under the surface. Because in the end, it's not about the money, and I am absolutely better off with the experience.
I concur to John on this. To imabeapirate : please come back in a few years time and share with us what you've learned over these years; most likely it will not resemble what you are saying here. I hold 3 patents in 3 different countries (Europe) and If I were to start all over again, I would definitely stay away from any patent process. If you have a say when it comes to a new product, it is customers that will pay for your idea/product/efforts/hopes/dreams/etc. Just my 2 cents.
To both of you, how has it gone with your patents? Mihai, wouldn't getting a patent protect from someone ELSE trying to stop you from making/selling the product?
Me to I could write a book on it!
Wow this is a good perspective!
@@sl4983 I'm pretty sure you can't file a patent for products that are already in the marketplace.
Thank you for posting this. Very well done - nice broad coverage of the types of intellectual property with specific information on what each is, the costs and time to implement and implications for enforcement. Haven't seen anything covering this much info so well in such a short amount of time in an easy to understand and entertaining format. Great job!
Nice video, John. I also obtained a patent for a mechanical design that I was having made. What I didn't know is that you have to make additional payments to the patent office in order to keep the patent after it's been issued. I was very happy that I was able to keep the "total" cost of obtaining the patent at $15K (10 years ago). That is, until I found out that I had to pay the patent office every now and then to maintain the patent.
As a former corporate commercial attorney, I find the legal discussion is a little anachronistic. I side with motion that small shops ought not get patents. My reasoning is that patents are useful for actions between manufacturers of products that are subject to mass distribution. Therefore the "age of patents" was pretty much the age of mass distribution, which was tied to the age of mass media. I say "was", because that age seems to be passing. Socialist states still have mass distribution, however surveillance capitalism is creating a reemergence of tailored distribution networks, and local brokers with local endorsements. To understand why patent law is pretty much useless with tailored distribution networks, imagine trying to rip off Matsura machines. You would have to work so hard to copy their precision that you would be a master tool maker in your own right. Their customised, continuous discipline of excellence precludes theft of IP. As Steve Jobs said, you can't steal excellence. Nor can you patent it. Therefore, if you are a small shop, or otherwise wish to build a business based on local endorsement and tailored distribution networks, it follows that your focus must be upon excellence, and the value of human relationships that endorse your values in the local network. Patents, and their lawyers, are for planned economies of scale. If you are in one, get one.
Ok, but not everyone is trying to rip off Matsura machines. They’re usually ripping off claimed utility on a less granular scale.
@@crypastesomemore8348 it's an example of excellence that's it
This made me decide to push through with the production and getting my invention to market and focus all my money and energy to the creation part not the patenting part that is very draining, vague and has very small benefit for someone like me who is just starting out
Enjoyed the chat guys, lots of helpful info there!
I agree. I spent about $300K on numerous worldwide patents and then when it comes to enforcing it, the large companies has setup the system so that it is impossible to defend it without several hundred thousand more to defend it. The patent system is totally screwed.
I've been an inventor, designer, manufacturer, and marketer of hundreds of professional technical tools for more than 50-years and have never applied for a patent on a single one! In the 80's I read an article from a fellow inventor stating the following: patents provide zero protection, they provide only one thing, the precedent to sue an infringer in a court of law. If you do not have the sizeable money to pay an attorney to bring this lawsuit to court, attorneys will rarely if ever, take a patent infringement case on contingency, unless it provides multiple millions of dollars for the attorney. In addition, if you do not bring suit against every infringer on your patent, you will lose the ability to bring suit after only one year! This is why I've never applied for a patent, I simply marketed my products with a money back guarantee of utility, and at a reasonable price for the marketplace. David Riddle
Glad you had an attorney in this video, as I have recently learned myself you need to talk to someone who actually knows what they are talking about. The law is not something an entrepreneur should be trying to take on, its not a problem you can easily solve by working it out yourself, researching on the internet, watching youtube videos or asking friends (unless they are attorneys). There is a point at which your (mine, the entrepreneur ect.) cheapness is a huge detriment to your business. I watched this video and came to the opposite conclusion of the video title.
NYC CNC I would just say don't let the "potential nightmare" of having to defend a patent immediately put you into a mindset that a patent is beyond you or not for you. I used to think that myself until I spoke with people that have patents and spoke with a good/reputable IP firm. I have come to believe that the process of having experienced people perform a prior art search is a great way to help you understand if what you think is a great idea actually is, and it is immensely valuable in helping you make the decision of taking the next step to file an application or not. I'm surprised Tye didn't touch on that, because the more I learn the more I believe doing so is one of the most essential steps in the process.
bensbenz - Dead nuts on. You get it.
Hopefully you guys can shed some light on my situation if you don't mind: I have an idea I've been sitting on that I don't want to develop. I have the basic idea, you could run in a dozen different directions with it, and to be honest: some of them are over my head. What I'd like to do is take my idea to some companies, and see if they'd like to buy it from me. I assume here that I would need a patent, right? I have no protection if I go out and shop my idea around without at least having submitted? Or is that where the one year rule comes into effect?
Manufacturing corporations usually will not even listen to your pitch because likely they are doing R & D themselves and could be working on something similar. If they were to listen to your pitch and subsequently introduce their product to market, they would be susceptible to being sued by you claiming they stole your idea.
If you try to sell an idea that you have no patent on, then you are most likely wasting your time and money.
If your idea has potential value, your best interests would be served if you seek out competent legal advise to guide you.
bensbenz a thorough search is *the* most essential step, if only to learn how to make your invention, and patent, better.
The idea is maybe 10-20% of a product - as you said, it's all in the execution and the work to bring it to market
this is why you have problems AFTER you sold your product, because it is then when the counterfit goes handy......it will be stupid to counterfit something you will not know it sells or not.
@SaltyBrains agree. Im working on my idea and its hard work. And nobody would help until they see success
As a youngster, I invented a system related to safety, I patented it, then the US military stole the patented system and installed it on military gear. I rapidly found that it was impossible to sue them and win. So, in revenge against the company that built the gear for the US military, I released all rights in the system to every competitor of that company and we engaged in “cross licensing” where we each had free use of the others patented things. Later we came up with the auto cross licensing of improvements, so the constant creep of development was covered. The firm that stole my idea and sold it to the US government is now about 1/10th the size it was back then.
How do you pass the sniff test? 😮
@@ChrisEudy-ut4rsHe doesn’t
That never happened
I would like to tell you about how the USPTO has ripped me off. I filed electronically for a patent on Aug 22, 2018 and a week later I get a letter from USPTO stating that I had "MISSING PARTS". I was apparently missing the ADS or application data sheet which is part of the initial USPTO EFS WEB application process and is mandatory to proceed to each step of the application process before hitting the final submit button. So how could the ADS form be missing? Second, the Declaration of Oath document was missing and upon talking with USPTO they said I did not sign my name properly with a forward slash mark at the beginning and end of my name which would denote it as an electronic signature. Seriously TWO FORWARD SLASHES? How am I suppose to know this? USPTO could not tell me what happened to the original ADS and they told me to fill out and send document AiA-08 and disregard ADS form AiA-014 as it was too long (8 pages) and send AIA-08 instead. A week later I receive another letter stating that I was still missing the same identical parts to the application plus I was missing a $80.00 surcharge fee. Penalty Really? Supposedly they charge surcharge fees when they consider anything missing, late or is paper delivered through the mail. How can they charge me a penalty for something that is missing from their data system and not my error? Well I was not going to have any of this and I was certainly not going to send them another $80.00 so I sent multiple forms to two different USPTO departments on 10-01-18 requesting abandonment of application and request for refund $480.00 along with a lengthy letter describing why and what happened in my case. I sent the abandonment form so that I could request the refund which makes sense right. I receive a letter from USPTO on 10-9 stating that they received my request for refund and to wait at least 30 days for a response. Meanwhile they take another $80.00 SURCHARGE FEE directly out of my bank account on 10-15 without permission. I called USPTO today 10-25 and they stated my refund request was dismissed!!! That meant I would not get any of my money back. Unbelievable! I was told to call Teresa Williams and was told by this person that since I abandoned the application I was not due a refund. I told Williams I abandoned the application so that I could get the refund. The USPTO also had their data base down for almost a week just prior to submitting my main patent application so I informed Williams that this may be the reason the ADS form was missing. I am told by Williams that he will call me next week after he speaks to a supervisor about this matter.
I tried to make this comment as brief as possible but there is much more to this and the frustration is unbearable. I have spoken with 15-20 people since Aug 22 and nothing is ever clear. This has to be one of the biggest scams ever. The USPTO is not user friendly, they don't care about the little guy and especially one without an attorney. Obviously they are out for the money and don't give a damn about anything else. They speak as if everything is a matter of fact and that is the way it is with no explanation as to why.
The patent game is for the rich period. If your poor and try to submit an application on your own as I did then good luck because I can't even get past submitting the application and they already have $560.00 to keep as they wish even if it's their error. I say USPTO is a SCAM!
I will try and post an update after Williams contacts me next week.
Did you file a provisional Patent Application?
I did and My attorney dropped me on the basis of A comflict of interest for he had a product similar to mine After 2 years of paying a retainer feed $ 2000.
@@gonzooznog8986 Well you should of got your retainer fee back since the lawyer dropped it due to conflict of interest.
So what I did was call my bank and disputed the charges. The bank refunded my money after USPTO did not respond to the dispute.
Really appreciate you taking the time to make this type of vid. I'd be interested to hear what your lawyer says about filing a patent to protect against future patent trolls (someone patenting the idea you're executing on and taking you to the cleaners).
I'm a design engineer and have been generating patents for my customers or employers for years. In one interesting case I came up with a critical solution to a problem that threatened a $30M development project. We applied for a patent but it was rejected because a competitor had designed something virtually identical and patented it first. However I noted that the function of the feature as listed in their patent, while also a benefit, was different than the primary reason we designed it. I asked the lawyer to resubmit the patent on these grounds and it was awarded.
But there are reasons to patent, just ask the Robert Kearns regarding intermittent wipers.
As a 30+ year patent/trademark/copyright lawyer, it was refreshing to see a real patent lawyer address these questions and correct some common misconceptions. Two things that may not have been emphasized enough, IMO, are: 1) The ability to enforce patent rights is largely dependent on the value of the patent; and 2) the ability to protect with trade secret law depends largely on the ability to keep the technology secret after commercialization. For #1, if the technology does not have a commercial value in excess of $1M, it is unlikely that it would make sense to enforce through actual litigation. You will still be able to enforce against innocent infringers who just didn't know, but the option to sue someone who is knowingly trying to cheat is limited. For #2, trade secrets are a valid option when you can commercialize the technology without competitors being able to reverse engineer it. But if the technology can be reverse engineered as soon as the product hits the market, the value of trade secret protection is essentially zero.
Another comment, the $20K (or so) cost to obtain and maintain a patent is chicken feed in the world of products with value. Maybe I'll want to enforce it, maybe I won't, but it's at least a bargaining chip and may keep some competitors at bay. I've seen clients decide not to pursue patent protection for "trivial" improvements that they thought were likely not patentable and of limited value, only to have a competitor file for a patent on that same technology and end up costing the client 10x the cost of a patent to defend against the competitor's assertion of infringement. Do that a couple of times and the economics of whether to pursue patent protection can start to look different.
Great video. Not a big fan of the clickbait and somewhat deceptive (IMO) title. It seems to suggest that people should not get patents, and while that is true in some/many cases, it is certainly not true is many other cases. Like when the technology cannot be kept a secret and has real commercial value.
I can definitely see what you're saying, the trade secrets only work in certain situations, and what you describe in the second paragraph is the situation that I fear. Which makes me think, for that reason above all, I should just go ahead and pursue a patent. If I can protect myself from being able to be made to stop, then I can come to terms with the other risks, which I may not necessarily be able to (or see worthwhile to) enforce...seeing tweaked versions pop up, seeing Chinese copies pop up, etc. As long as I can still do what I'm doing, that's what matters most to me. Is this a reasonable thought pattern to have?
This was a very helpful comment. Thank you
20k isn’t nothing when its that or making payroll. (im about to let a bunch of preliminary patends expire)
@@mshepard2264 $20K is not a significant expense if it gets you a patent with significant commercial value. But you’re correct - to small businesses without the ability to generate short-term revenue, it can be significant indeed. It’s a cash-flow issue, which can be a killer for small businesses.
This reminds me of the Wright brothers. Once they flew, they were in court and spending their new wealth fighting other inventors on patent rights. Same as the guy who invented TV. RCA steam roller over him, he didn’t have the resources to defend his patent in court.
while they talk about McDonald's, all I can see is the yellow air line on the mill which clearly infringes the McDonald's trade mark!
haha, well spotted.
Dude you can't patent horse meat sandwiches AKA mc burger..
Look at all those golden arches..
Well played ... oops I ripped off Cheetos Chester cheetah
Great discussion.
.
In the case of a patent infringement by a 'small' competitor you can get them to stop their infringement by the threat of legal action alone. In my example (a Trademark) I found a few companies infringing on my trademark. I contacted the companies and directed them to the Government site showing my registration and gave them a written order to stop. They don't know how deep my pockets are, but they realise that they stand to lose a lot of money if they continue (legal fees alone). So they stopped. The patent/trademark can simply be a deterrent and I'm grateful to our legal system for it.
.
As for my deepest company production secrets, I don't patent those ideas (as you said the recipe is made public); I can't police the inside process of a competitor's factory (I would need a court order to start). I have my staff sign non-disclose agreements (and employment restrictions) and train my staff on what they can and cannot discuss even in their social circles. I keep my production processes as an intellectual property secret.
.
As it turns out, a patent would be handy as banks do favor you if you have a patent (discussed in minute 25).
.
As a word to everyone - listen carefully to the lawyer (minute 20). Please don't get mistaken between copyright and trademark (I often hear misunderstandings on this topic). Also remember that it costs good money to file a copyright/trademark/patent, thus 'first to file', may not be easy. Some people want to make money from the product first so that they can file a patent later.... but there is a 1 year limit (life is not easy).
Thanks for sharing
John I feel as if you weren't listening to your friend. It seems like the whole time he was giving reasons why parents can actually be helpful, and then you would chime in and say "yeah that's right DON'T GET A PATENT". It seems like is a more gray area than you thought.
couldn't agree more!!!
Thank you for covering this, I think there is a perception most of us have that patents are the path to making money. After extensively researching patents, I concluded open source for most products is the better choice for society and can still be very very profitable. In my opinion patents stifle creativity. Trademarks and copyrights are important though, I don't mind someone selling a copy of my product but I would be furious if they put my company name on it.
Cripple Concepts - Groan. To sum up your point, just give it to the Chinese or Indians. You have a crappy attorney.
The thing is, and I agree with Cripple Concepts here - That patents limit.
Look at 3D printers. Patented around 1980; the patent then eventually ran out, giving way for an open and active DIY community. Rarely has a concept exploded AND became so widely and cheaply available for EVERYONE.
Additionally: If you are the original creator and you strive for the fine, well-made details, and offer great quality for good price, then your product will sell. Chinese or Indian copies just won't have the same appeal. Even if they are cheaper - they still probably won't be as good as yours.
John - Absolutely true. Some industries, products, and customers are more conducive to open source than others. I work primarily on accessories for power wheelchairs, an industry that is heavily regulated, very proprietary, hard to enter, and that has resulted in archaic equipment, expensive equipment, and minimal ability for consumers to enhance the equipment they rely on. If your customers aren't asking for open source, if a concept is truly novel, if disclosure of design specs could lead to illegal or dangerous use of your product, or there is high probability someone can use your idea and under sell or out market you then I agree 100% on no patent but closed source. For very novel ideas, especially those ideas that are very costly/risky to develop (pharmaceuticals come to mind) I think patents with a limited life make sense. Your SMW products are great examples of products not worth patenting, making open source would probably not benefit many people, and whether open or closed source could be easily replicated but likely at a lower quality.
Crocellian - As I stated in my reply to John, what your product is and what your goal is with that product matters. If somebody want to replicate my products and sell them I will be ecstatic. I sell products to improve people's lives and most of my customers are impoverished. I get more pleasure from designing and prototyping than mass producing. I do not want to spend every dime I make fighting lawsuits to defend international patents. Lots of open source companies are extremely profitable, Lulzbot and Adafruit being two companies who are leaders in open source hardware. Patents are not right for every product, open source is not right for every company or product, I appreciate John giving his opinion and having a patent attorney give his opinion in this video, there is no one size fits all approach to intellectual property rights. I have heard John talk repeatedly about his position on partners, I have listened/read the opinions of numerous other entrepreneurs on the issue of partners, like with intellectual property decisions the decision to take on partners is very individual.
I think that Todd did a very good job with the discussion. He can't (and no patent attorney can) pull a rabbit out of a hat.
Exactly. Say you have a patent and a big company violates your patent... They will drag out the lawsuit until you can't afford to pursue any longer. So the conclusion is that a patent isn't worth the paper it's written on. Unless you can license it out or sell it like Ty talked about.
Thanks John, another superb info source. Ty is a very well spoken and knowledgeable guy, props to him for his smooth and understandable explanation of the system.
Patents in general have stifled creativity. I used to keep a notebook of my ideas for potential patent but pretty much just keep it now as a wish list of things to make/use. I'll never get a patent from the reasons cited here in John's video and from research I did 20-30 years ago. Like many have said before, it takes money to make money, and there is no better example than patents. Much better to just contribute as open source software/hardware. The Chinese see all ideas (patented or not) as "sharing" in order to make whatever they want. It would be next to impossible to stop them or anyone like them.
Greaat Information for those of us who aren't familiar with patent law... but it is really soooo much more complex than this
thanks for the information and going thru the difficulties and efforts to do these interviews etc john
I guess it's better to market and manufacture full steam . Make the money and get out fast . Move on to the next project and do it again and again. Then seek everything and retire. Good advice! Thank you
Thank you for the upload, John. Good points. I'm also an inventor and a machnist. I've been fortunate enough to purchase a small machine shop plug and play, where i do strictly my projects, no walk in traffic or jobs outside. l have one invention gone to market and is currently on the shelf. This video helped me on the question i've had too, is do I really need a patent. I've learned like what John pointed out, that patents only give you the teeth to go after an infringer in court. There is no patent police, you have to be the police and spend the money to go after that bad guy. Another is every inventor thinks his idea can be or will be stolen. Most of time, the idea is placed on a shelf and never see the light of day, but that inventor has that assurance nobody will get to his idea. John saying, just go for it, and go to market, chances are, nobody will steal your idea or copy your product. Even if you have a patent, you still have to spend money to defend it...
Year 2021: There is any way to have open patents? there is any legal resource to have as a new open standard protected by the international laws?
On a tangential note, there also exists the Ⓜ (letter M in a circle), for "Integrated circuit layout design protection", you probably only encounter it when you play with strong fuming nitric acid and a microscope. It's for asserting the rights to a chip design in the electronics industry.
I'm with you John, I'd rather spend my time looking forward and executing than playing defence. I've seen a lot of good companies fall flat by taking their eye off the ball. Ideally you'll want to do both but there are a lot of factors to consider.
I agree with that philosophy.
SPOT ON. Thank you for your deep insights.. I greatly under-estimated the preview thumbnail before I clicked, and then you started spitting fire lol. You rockstar. Thanks..
You say to 'crush it on execution without a patent.' What, then, protects you from being hit with a cease and desist, or even sued for royalties, for violating a patent issued to some passer by that realized you hadn't protected your IP?
Not a lawyer, but work in a company where patents are an important part of the business, and have been trained on patents every couple of years since I joined 6 years ago. So take this as it's written with a pinch of salt and pepper, but:
If you can show that you already have invented the widget, and made it public, BEFORE the other company patented it, their patent is still invalid. It is called "prior art" (it existed before the patent application). This ONLY fails if you have not put it on the market or have published the workings of the widget before the other company made the patent application. You do not need a patent to claim prior art, just some reasonable published records. One of the tasks of a patent lawyer and/or the patent office is to search for "prior art" so that they don't file patents that aren't going to be valid. This is also why some patent applications are very detailed, and others more general. In the typical case, the detailed one is describing how it is different from something else that is patented in a more generic way.
I think what John says is that: If you make the BEST widget, at a reasonable price, get it to market before your competitor, you ONLY need a patent to stop the other guy from making the same thing. For MANY products, there's little reason to expect anyone else is going to make the same thing, even if you can sell lots of them. Marketing, making the thing well, and selling a good quality product is more important than a patent in running a business - in most cases at least. Particularly for a small company, that can't really afford to spend $$$$$$$ on defending the patent in court. If patent was the only thing making a company great, then none of your well known brand companies such as Starrett, Snap-On, Sandvik, Harley-Davidsson and Honda, etc would remain in business. They don't make things with patents (they do invent new things and use patents to prevent their competitors from doing the same thing for a while, sure, but most of their products are way more than 15 years since they were first invented), they make good products that people are willing to pay more for, than the cheap copies from China (Yes, they MAKE things in China too, because that way, we get lower cost versions of those things)
Sorry if that turned into a bit of an essay!
@@matspatpc I think this could be somewhat analogous to "Crescent wrenches" and "Vise grips"
Though they probably did have patents at the time, they made something unique and branded that people sought out those brands for those kinds of tools rather than "Adjustable wrenches" and "Locking pliers"... They made a product that was really darned good right from the start and that locked the market to their branded version of the tool.
@@matspatpc unrelated but this guy I work with only buy snap on aka strap on tools and we call him strap on man and he gets pissed
@@thekekronomicon590made me laugh😂😂
It comes down to this you got to be better than your competitor
Unless the competitor tells you to stop copying their patent?
Thanks for the video. This is an interesting topic as I am actually a Patent Attorney and file a lot of patents globally. Utility Patents are not the solution for every invention. I recommend talking to patent attorney about your invention before commercialising as once you have sold or published your invention its often too late to claw back inventorship rights. Often a cheaper way of protecting smaller innovations is to apply for a Design Patent which cost significantly less and are much easier to enforce as there is no argument about claim language and the innovation only has to be new and not necessarily inventive.
john great vid, as an inventor/engineer you talk a lot of sense. the point I would like to raise is once you get a patient everyone and there dog knows how your idea works, let them work it out themselves, don,t give away all the hard work. its easy to stand on the shoulder of giant's.
.
We hold hundreds of patents and license it out. Most of them are technology patents. So we don't patent the actual item. We patent the technology that goes into them. Our Segway/iBot gyros are patented for instance and licensed it out. We do the R&D and license it to large corporations.
Occams Sawzall Love your handle. I was so disappointed in the societal reaction to the Segway. Everyone was like "Oh. A scooter." and I was like "We'll have bipedal motion control in no time!"
ArgentOrangeOK
Truth told. The Segway was just a fun side project at the time. Was never really meant for it to take off as a huge thing. Mostly just a test rig for the gyros and stability controls.
If you wanna see bipedal robotics systems look up Boston Dynamics. Probably some of the best rigs out there right now.
Occams Sawzall, that in itself is the nature of your business. You are not trying to sell these products. Your product is the design.
Alvarez Metal Works
Our product is the technology. Which other companies use to make products.
So yes. We do "just design" but it's a bit more than that. As cheesy as it sounds, we sell solutions. Sometimes we come up with things no one has an immediate use for, but we patent it anyway because 3-5 years from now it may be a multi-million $ solution to a problem. It's always a gamble, but they're pretty calculated gambles.
Occams Sawzall again that is your product and the nature of your business. He's talking about people that come up with an product that they want to build and sell. You do not do that. I understand what you do as I'm sure everyone else does too. We get it. However he's not talking about you or others like you.
Paul Akers (Fastcap) talked about this in depth on his channel and had some of the same opinions. I've heard the horror stories from others where infringement has happened and despite forking over enormous amounts of cash to patent their product and protect it, the legal system fails them and they lose. I like what you said about using all of the resources and energy to crush the product in the marketplace. A great example is someone like the Grimsmo brothers. Someone can quite easily knock off John's designs, but it will never be a "Grimsmo" knife; and that's what people pay him for (aside from wicked knives). Great dicussion John! Looking forward to more videos from you in this style, bringing in guests!
Really good, defendable patents cost $50k or so (I'm on several), I've heard it said that even good patents are merely a $50,000 gun which shoots $1,000,000 bullets (because that's what it costs to defend). Unless you can afford to buy the bullets, the gun is near useless.
I agree with you 100% need help selling or licensing my patent and other ppA products
does a provisional patent help protect your design. asked another way, is it possible to file a design patent at a later date while being protected by a provisional patent?
Your $10k and 2 year time to issue figures are pretty optimistic, especially for any patent worth having. If you want a very narrow patent with limited claims, I.e, something for bragging rights and to hang on the wall, those might be accurate enough. If you want something that is broader and may protect against minor mod copycats and offer the possibility for continuations to make a patent family, you are probably looking at $25k to $50k and 3-5 years...especially if it's a crowded space with lots of prior art. If you go international it depends greatly on which countries you pick, but you should count on $80k plus.
There are cases where patents make sense, and cases where they don't. You listed some good reasons not to get one, but it really depends on what the invention involves, what the market potential is, etc. There are lots of situations where they still make sense but it's important to know the difference and why you want one.
Good video, that will probably help a bunch of folks avoid needless costs, or to protect valuable IP...probably both.
-- Mike
I'm not a lawyer, but I spent several years helping folks get patents, so I'm fairly familiar with the process, costs, and various reasons to get one or to skip it.
Hey Mike, I'm seeking patent advise. Anyway I can ask you some questions?
Very informative. At 23:14 the attorney points out that if you want to pursue getting a patent, the clock starts when you first publicly disclose your invention, offer it for sale or sell it, put it on Instagram, etc., and you then have a year to file your application.
I am unclear, does that means you have a year to file a Provisional Patent Application? Or, does that mean you must file for the Utility Patent itself within that one year. I am currently preparing a Provisional Patent Application for an invention that I began selling 7 months ago. So, will I have 12 months to file for a Utility Patent or 5 months? ...Thanks
What about just using a PPA to start with? (Provisional Pattent Application).
I'm with you John. Get in, get your money, then get out. Trademark is worth it though, because there may be many toilet lifting tools, but there's only one "Crapperjack!"
"This is self serving" sign of a good bloke. Thanks for this great info. Complicated area for sure, get help from people with experience seems very reasonable to me!
So basically making fixture plates compatable with yours, but for machines that you do not proviede?
Risky video, but practical. I appreciate both perspectives. thanks for sharing, John!
It's an old video, but an interesting little discussion and still quite relevant. I found it useful, if only to confirm some of my thoughts but also just to hear some tidy explanations of details we all know but perhaps not quite. Good video 👍🏻
John, you should be marking both NYC CNC and Saunders Machine Works logos with "TM". You should also talk to your lawyer about marking all of the files (both Fusion 360 files and any gcode) with copyrights and license information. I know you frequently share those files (especially with patreon contributors) at no cost and that's fine, but a copyright and license statement would protect you from misuse of those works. For example, you could attach a license, indicating that non-commercial uses are permitted. That would prevent others from financially benefiting from your work without your consent. A license can also include indemnification clauses, protecting you from liability.
I pursued getting a utility patent but not so much to protect from being ripped off but more because I found larger companies that may want to carry your product are far less interested in it if it's not patented. They don't want to be ripped off either. Also I found other production shops are not as interested in making it for you in the event you have to outsource the manufacturing if it's not patented. Again, they are not interested in being scooped by other shops.
I just filed a PPA for an idea I want to sell to a large company and just get a licensing deal. I have read that 25 percent net profit to the inventor is usual. Is that true?
Is there another explanation of the step-by-step process of patenting a patent in USPTO, knowing that I am now registered in PCT
Very topical and informative. I'm "new school" Open source, and I'll build it for me, for my use, and I'm happy. I have a good friend, loves patents, has 80+ of them, very old school, but I feel that his way of "business" is approaching it's end. Thanks for discussing this.
I agree with you. I got a patent 25 years ago and had no means to make the product and was not able to maintain the patent and I could not get anyone to buy the idea so I wasted about $6000. Had I talked to this guy then I might not have gotten one. About 10 years ago I saw a tool very similar to what I designed being used on the show How Its Made.
How its made, Gret show
Where selling on amazon is concerned, a patent is very useful. Amazon will remove all competitors and u get way more sales. However, you are right if amazon or any protective platform is not in the equation.
@Lm83679 Stop that cut n paste... so bad
why would it take >2 years to get a utility patent when a provisional only lasts a year?
A provisional patent is not examined or published and there's little requirement on the content. It's quick to get a provisional patent while you continue to develop the idea, before going after the utility patent.
Kent VanderVelden well sure, that I understand. but if you file a provisional and you have it for a year, then how are you supposed to get a full utility within the one year of protection by the provisional, if the full utility takes 2 years to get?
+Frugal Duel You misunderstand the timelines involved. As it was explained to me: The Provisional is a bit like the obsolete 'first to invent' system, in that it gives you a 'placeholder' in line in case some other comes up with a similar thing at a similar time. Expiration of a Provisional does not prevent you filing again later, even much later. How long it takes to _be granted_ a patent is not at issue on this point. Still it's best to have your ducks pretty well in line before getting too formal.
I'm not sure I follow your question, but maybe the following will help. One could file a provisional to get a date on the idea. Then, within a year of filing the provisional, begin the process of converting the provisional to a utility patent claiming the date of the provisional. The duration between when you begin a patent and it's issuance, if ever, is not certain to be two years. Do your own research. A sound IP strategy is important to business and attorneys on your side are huge assets.
What happens if you disclose your idea or start Manufacturing and selling your idea without patenting it and after some years you found out that someone got patent on it. Can they sue u in that case ?
I think the patent laws and the way the system is set up was a great thing back in the day. Way back, when it was relevant, sometime before I was born. Like many laws that aren’t practical today it needs to be updated, possibly even done away with and an entirely new system put in place that is more relevant in today’s world, then again the patent system never was for the average guy, it certainly didn’t help Philo Farnsworth.
A LOT of people don’t understand the difference between a patent, trademark, and copywrites. I would greatly enjoy a video on trademark laws and their practical implications, as well as Your (John Saunders) opinion as well as a professionals. I recently had a product blatantly ripped off, I knew that would happen eventually, and I’m ok with a little competition... but the guy goes as far as calling his product the same name as My product, which I have spent 4+yrs marketing, building the brand, and making it a household name (in the small niche market and circles I travel) which is practically synonymous with my business name. Others have made similar products but always used their own unique name. Your 100% right though, just kill it in the marketing dept and keep making good parts, the offshore guys are going to do what they want regaurdless, it’s a real shame when it’s a fellow entrepreneur here in the states that doesn’t have the decency to stay off your toes.
Under the Berne Convention, you do not need to mark the original expression in a tangible medium of expression (copyright). But if you do, your damages are more easily calculated, as Todd mentions. Copyrights are handled by the Library of Congress, not the USPTO.
Thanks for the information. After this video I am not getting a paten. Thank you for saving me money and the headache.
@12:30
Just imagine if you had a patent showing ownership. You could get in touch with eBay and they would remove the knockoff versions from eBay.
Additionally, on the subject of someone can just tweak the design and patent that tweak ... if you had a provisional patent starting out, it gives you one year to make those tweaks, adjustments and improvements before you submit your non provisional. That would protect you from someone else stepping in with a tweak improvement. If you are really all in on your product, you should spend that provisional year looking on how to improve your own idea.
so i know a product that has a patent pending in the USA . the problem is the product has been made before in china and its being sold on aliexpress from a Chinese factory. I have also found the factory that makes that product and i am in Australia not Usa. I want to buy and sell the product myself as i have the direct source in china. with that being said what powers and protection does that American company have for there pattern pending product?
There is a time and a place to file patents. As a start up, it's a tough call if it's financially viable to shell out the bucks. If it s a REVOLUTIONARY product or item, that might make it easier or more viable to go down that road but it is an item by item decision.
Years ago when I started, I had an old customer tell me......."Come up with something and pound the crap out of it and make every penny you can making, selling and marketing that product. When someone else comes along and starts the same thing, it's time to change. When that 3rd entity starts production, walk away, the market is diluted and move on to your next venture.
Sounds odd but it has worked every time and made me wheel barrows of bucks. I don't care about the design or monies after I leave the idea, it's old and time to go for it on something else. Let the next guy make what he can, I have already made my money.
I'm like John, small company that has regular customers but also hammers out the job shop type work only I work in wood. Life has been good to me and the way I do it works and works well.
I invented a product and it had the name armor in it and under armour “spelled different” sued me. There attorney called me and said they loved my logo design and name and they didn’t want to compete with it on a clothing line. Basically I was young and feel I got hamstrung by them. He flat out told me they had millions and they would tie me up in lawsuits constantly if I didn’t agree not to put the logo on clothing.
That is how the big companies work. Note that chinese knockoff products will do that by changing the spelling of a word that sounds similar. If in court the lawyers can assert the general public would still associate the fake product with, then that is infringement. Keep in mind that if the brand name becomes a generic word, like Kleenex and elevator, the right to enforce gets difficult.
BEST video yet!!! Same reason that I got into machining is wanting to build my own products but I've been stressing about this very subject for years now. Thanks for the info
I was wondering, if you copy write the drawings for an injection mold, make a detailed description would you have any protection of a design or invention? Though you wouldn't have protection of the end product but would you have protection of the molds, drawings and descriptions of the equipment that was used to make the end product? Sorta end around run on the protection that is afforded by a patent with a much cheaper initial cost.
When I was a kid in the early 80s there was a strange old man who lived on his own over the road for me in this rotting old house. I found out later that he was the guy who invented some sort of rocker mechanism thats apparently in all modern washing machines and patented it and licensed it to GE and made millions on it in the 1940s-1950s. Thats millions in 1950s money by the way. Spent the rest of his life trying to come up with more things to patent but never really struck gold again. But he also never had to work another day again, so he just lived in this messed up old mansion over the road from us, on his own. We where kind of scared of him actually, he was pretty wierd.
What does his lifestyle have to do with anything? This guy profited from the patent.
Excellent, intelligent conversation... Try to take copying or counterfeiting of your product as a compliment... You are at least on the ground floor of a great idea...
Okay... So, patents are only good for big corporations. That lawyer basically just confirmed that. Thats why he kept using big corporations in his example.
So... The take away from this video is that Patents are more trouble than theyre worth, if youre a small inventor.
If you are a small inventor, the only person benefiting from that Patent is aomeone like this amazing Salesman in the video. The Lawyer.
What if you go to market with something and it gets copied and patented out from under you?
You will spend the 50K if the invention makes you much more money than 50K. If the invention doesn't earn money, then you don't enforce it.
you can do a lot of the leg work yourself and save $. and i agree about the "it is your option to enforce"...
what was this first product?
wahkeen2 www.google.com/patents/US8608169
I believe it was his rimfire steel shooting targets. But then where he actually made money was with the go-pro/gun mounts that he had made originally just to shoot promotional videos.
You can submit a 'design' patent yourself for only a few hundred dollars.
Of course, it doesn't have the same protection as a utility patent, but if your patent is
mainly based on the 'ornamental appearance', then it's a fantastic option. Then you can
use the term 'patented' on your product. That perceived increase in value to your product is
worth it the measly few hundred dollars!!! The book _Patent It Yourself_ is the 'bible' in the industry.
This is an eye-opener and beautifully described video. Thank you very much for the Video. All the best.
From your discussion implies that publication in Instagram,
youtube or facebook , etc… can be used as a prove that you are the first
inventor. I mean you can use that publication in court to defend your patent,
right?
Yes, but before selling anything I have to apply at list for provisional patent which is about ($400). Because anyone can steal that idea, if its not protected with provisional patent. On each product I have to print "Patent Pending" with the number or the provisional patent application.
NOT AT ALL......if you make your invention visible on youtube, you are REJECTING to hold the patent on those inventions, because you are making them PUBLIC.
Legally, you cannot even tell your neighbour about it, nor let anyone in your family see it. Otherwise, for the law is then of public domain.
You have to first protect the invention, and THEN make the youtube video.
My father was a partner in a farm equipment manufacturing business in the '60s and '70s. His business had a few patents just to prevent the competition from patenting their products and prevent them from manufacturing their own product. They did not do this on everything they made, just on the main revenue items.
In their industry it was not difficult change a product in a minor way and get another patent, but they did not want to continually reinvent their already "Perfect" product.
Great topic We all have any idea and have thought about a patent but have no idea where to start and the cost. Thank you for sharing GW
This has been my opinion for years. When you instigate a patent the legal searches to discover if your invention is original - in the region of £36,000 and you still don't have protection. sell the idea and let the buyer have the headache. Interesting to hear about design patent. If you protect yourself for EU, UK and USA the chances are China will have your product on the market before you. 26:00 there we go. - Still watching and learning, interesting piece. Thanks for the CB John.
but china cannot sell it to EU UK nor USA, and you have a right to seize and order to destroy (or keep for yourself) any counterfit which touches UK, USA, or EU territories. To who they will sell it? Cambodia?
First, never ask a lawyer for his opinion. The lawyer will always go with the legal answer.... But, if you invent something, you should ALWAYS patent the invention...even if only an inexpensive Provisional Patent. This gives you control over the invention. If you do not have the resources to market the invention, you should seek help from a marketing company or get your own investors. Worst thing that can happen to you is you invent something, go to market it without a patent, and be told by the law you have to stop marketing it because someone else copied and got a patent for YOUR idea. (Believe me from personal experience!)
What do I do about a app that people would enjoy.
I 100% agree with your views on patents. I have given the exact same advice in my videos many times.
Your comment at the end about people not really out to steal ideas reminded me of "The Lean Startup" by Eric Ries. In one of the later chapters he challenges people to call up big companies and have them try to still your idea. Even if you have something truly amazing, most organizations and leaders are too busy with the work they have to take on a new project to steal an idea.
What if you had something that would be really easy to mass produce? Would you get a utility and design patent?
Could you copywrite 3D printer files?
This video might be four years old but very relevant today for me. I've worked on a new product for just over the last two years and it's finally finished, I was thinking to patent it (and I already know it's totally unique and novel) but the reality is I'm an idea man. a visionary and an entrepreneur so why do I need a patent? I have and can continue to create so many things, I don't really need protection for this one thing. If I thought this new product could easily be turned around and sold to a large company for royalties etc... sure, then it would be a good idea, but this thing isn't going to be that big of a item. Having said that, one thing I did take from this conversation is the idea of making sure to put a registered trade mark physically on my products, that seems like a very good idea.
Thank you! This is what I need to hear.
How do we contact the attorney?
What do you think about defensive publication? At least, you are going to be able to block others to get the same patent.
is it worth getting a trademark on an idea that has never been tried before?
excellent, realistic view of both sides- thank you!
Really!!??!! THIS IS THE BEST ADVICE TO NEWBS, I have ever heard!!!!! Thank you 🙏
This may have been asked in earlier comments, but if design patents are an effective defence against counterfeit products, why have companies like Starrett and Mitutoyo been unable to stamp them out? If they can't do it what point is there in going to the trouble of protecting your product at all? If there are no protections that are recognised or enforced in countries like China, and more and more products are sold directly to customers (and thereby unlikely to come to the attention under counterfeit trafficking laws), are there any truly (cost-) effective measures that individuals or small businesses should invest in?
Hmmmmmmm………!! Great information but, Did anyone else had issues with the volume?
Thanks John!! This was very informative about the Patent process. Tell Tye , great job!!
Hi
Do you have some video for how to prevent breakage of end mill and other cutting tool on CNC milling machine
Thanks
Thank you so much! Going through this right now. Love your channel, learned a ton!