Comment by jacques_chester | Hacker News Reader

Comment by jacques_chester | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

jacques_chester

> The little guys simply can't play the same game.

Not on anything like the same scale.

I only rarely mention this on HN because it's like being a particularly obnoxious lightning rod in the tropics, but I have a patent pending at the moment. It's been a slow and expensive process.

So far I am about AUD $17k into the process. This has netted me a WIPO PCT filing, which I have now parlayed into an Australian filing and soon a USPTO filing.

What nobody tells you at the beginning is that it all takes much longer than you think it will. And costs a lot more, because you have to file in each country independently. If I am granted a US patent, that's the lynchpin, the key element that would make a portfolio of patents worth a damn. But then I will still need to stump thousands more dollars per country to file elsewhere.

A company like Apple doesn't have the problem of fretting over the cashflow implications. They are not carefully shepherding a single filing that cost-wise represents a meaningful fraction of their revenue and assets.

Instead, to many companies, patents are a pipeline. A factory. They have on-staff lawyers to pump a constant stream of applications into global offices. They have economies of scale and generous cashflows that I simply don't.

Because of the economics of the situation, patents favour wealthy incumbents, not upstart inventors. There's been a priority inversion.

A cheap idea I've had is to file only a "provisional patent application". Much cheaper e.g. $110 AUD for Australia (unless you're paying an attorney). I haven't checked other countries, but believe it's similar. You must file the actual patent application within a year. But, if you haven't disclosed it publicly yet (which includes commercial sale), you can just file another prov. http://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/get-the-right-ip/patents/apply... http://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/get-the-right-ip/patents/time-...

So it's something to offer to investors/dissuade competitors... within a year. That mightn't be enough time of course.

OTOH, though there is a zero-sum aspect, seeing it as war takes all the fun out of it :/

EDIT a prov just secures a priority date - so you can defer national vs. PCT an extra 12 months. It's confidential, so doesn't constitute public disclosure in itself. But... you're saying PCT members (eg USA) don't recognize an Aus prov priority date? That's a shame. If so, I guess one could file an individual prov in each nation of particular interest (eg USA), cheaper than an actual application, and then go the PCT route. But complex/hassle for just an extra year.

(also IANAL TINLA - but useful to hear!)

2nd reply as edit time has passed on my first reply.

> But... you're saying PCT members (eg USA) don't recognize an Aus prov priority date?

Not, as I understand it, unless you go through the PCT process instead of a national applicaiton.

It's the PCT application that grants the worldwide priority and flexibility. You can't do it afterwards, you have to do it first.

IANAL, TINLA.

Email me (see profile) if you want a referral to my lawyer. I like him.

The problem is that you need either to file everywhere at once, or file through the PCT process.

If you just file in one country, once the patent is disclosed, it's disclosed everywhere. You lose your opportunity to file in other countries.

I chose the PCT process. It costs more up front, but it gives me significant flexibility in terms of timing -- up to 30 months from initial filing date to begin national applications. That means I can see how the US application goes. If it is accepted, I will then file elsewhere.

In particular, a provisional application in Australia would give me no priority over a similar filing in the USA. But the PCT process gives me a worldwide priority date.

If I'd gone for the national-only route, I'd have had to file in all the countries of interest up front. Overall it's a cheaper option, but I don't have the kind of cashflow needed to file in a dozen places simultaneously.

Before I forget: IANAL, TINLA.

Seventeen thousand dollars? For one patent?

(AUD $17k = USD $15.7k according to Google.)

My car cost $6,500 USD. What are you buying for the price of $15,700? Just protection against competitors using your idea?

Seventeen thousand, yes.

For two patents, technically.

Well, even more technically: for two patent applications and a WIPO assessment that my technology is sufficiently novel and inventive to be patentable in most treaty countries.

> Just protection against competitors using your idea?

Yes and no. Certainly not protection of a business model, and not protection of a feature. It's a technology which underpins several potential business models, but while it is a better technology, it is not a necessary technology. A competitor -- and some exist already -- can bodge along without it, but they will inevitably have a PR disaster that my technology effectively prevents.

The real purpose of the patent is to increase attractiveness to investors and to encourage potential startup competitors to look at other markets. And if it all goes to total crap, I can still put the patent on my résumé. Or not, depending on what kind of company I'm applying to.

You'll forgive me if I don't discuss the subject matter of the patent. My competitors could easily burn up more of my cash by raising constant, spurious objections. Another part of the patent game.

Another part of the patent game.

I'm just trying to understand the incentives to play. Why care about other technology companies, unless they've patented what you're doing?

Because I'm a nobody from nowhere and I will take what advantages I can get (patentability) to ameliorate advantages I don't currently enjoy (connections, pedigree, experience).

USD $15K is a bargain. You can easily spend many times more than that for a patent.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com