Should I Patent My Widget for the Boat Industry?

Let’s just imagine that you have been recently slaving away in your very cool, very modern version of Geppetto’s work shop and you’ve come up with something that is every bit as nifty as Pinnochio… only your cool thing is a truly innovative doo-dad for the boating industry.

Suddenly, the heady rush of riches and fame come charging through your brain and it hits you like a huge exlosion! “My GOD! I need to get this thing patented before someone finds out about it and swipes my wonderfully inspired effort.”

Well, hold on just one minute there, Pilgrim. Perhaps you better give this article a full read before you rush off to the nearest Legal Office where they practice Intellectual Property Law.

Here’s my take on patents for boat stuff in general. All you guys out there in TV land can have your own take on these things and I encourage you to make your points known. It won’t change my opinion on the matter after 25 years of fiddling around producing video programs for start-up companies who blew a large wad on their chase to “get a patent in place” and then fitfully protect the same thing.

Real simple, patents can cost really large amounts of money. The more complex the claims in the patent application, the more money it takes for some patent attorney to make use of his selective knowledge of the arcane language of the patent application.

If patents could be submitted in normal language, there would be many fewer reasons for hiring of an attorney at $300 an hour to write this stuff for you. After all, who knows the way the machine works better than you?

For most patents, the big cost is in the process of the “patent search” so that you can quote many examples of prior art in your submission. Again, this is all part of the game, should you need to pursue some violator of your precious patent in a court of law. Notice how it, once again, comes back to a court scenario so that you need to hire another attorney to stand in for you?

After all, the patent by itself, is nearly worthless, save for the so-called ego boost one might get from being a “patented inventor”. It’s just a crappy, official looking document on your wall that just might impress your buddies when they come to visit. Without the desire and resources, as in MONEY to pursue the violators, the whole patent process is absolutely worthless as a business enterprise.

My take is that for the average guy, who has developed some really cool thing for the boating industry, the best thing to do is to take all the money that they would otherwise toss at a patent and save it for something else. The intellectual properties attorney, the draftsman who does the nifty and similarly arcane drawings of the invention and the fees at the patent office; Save it for another, more important thing…. That would be to use that money to invent the next best thing for the boating industry, OR… better yet, spend it on the marketing of the first really cool thing they did, so that they can achieve something like market penetration and hopefully, market share.

There is one exception to this patent thing for boaty kinds of things. That being the absolutely inconceivable potential that your patented device can properly be licensed out to a big time boat company for MILLIONS of dollars. Really, MILLIONS… as in the kind of money one might get for inventing a new medicine that cures five kinds of cancer. You know, the kind of cash machine idea that would move the desktop computer industry into the next millenium… Otherwise, it’s a huge waste of time and money and it will give you a false sense of confidence that you really have something worth fighting over.

It is just so damn easy to make a ten- percent improvement in an existing invention that, in the words of the Patent Office, moves the invention forward, that it’s ridiculous. Want to know how simple in actuality this all is… just go to a big tradeshow for any industry, you pick it, and watch the hordes of guys from Asia running around with digital cameras, taking pictures of everything under the sun that looks even mildly interesting.

Now, what do you suppose those dudes are doing with such a fervent sense of purpose? The answer is, and I hate to dump it on you nice guys who think otherwise, but they are swiping your ideas. They are shooting photos of your stuff so that they can take all that home and reverse engineer it. They will make some very small and virtually irrelevant change in the device and come roaring back next season (or sooner in some cases) with their own brand of your hard-earned super cool, next best thing. Now, don’t get me wrong that it’s only those Asian guys who are doing this. Everyone is doing the same thing, or they will soon find themselves without a job. Well, they will unless their company has a very high degree of ethics and they have their own super smart inventor dudes who don’t need the leg-up.

Think you can stop that? Think that it matters to them if they “might” get sued by you? Think they worry about your limited financial resources that totally inhibit your ability to mount an on-going legal procedure? Hey, my friend, this is modern business which is the civilized equivalent of open warfare without the explosions. If your figurative army is too small, you can only try to make a hasty retreat and lick your ego, literally.

All this boils down to the fact that you should be spending your lovely time, your creative problem solving genius inspiration and going down to the shop and inventing that “next best thing”. This will, once again, put you ahead of the market and force the other guys to play catch-up to your glowing capabilities.

Does all this make me sound bitter and hateful? Do you think that maybe I had one of these gotchya experiences myself and have the wounds to prove it? Well, I don’t.

I just worked around hundreds of creative industrial types, making video based marketing presentations for them and their really cool, patented new gizmos. Most of them, if their invention was, in fact, really cool, were unceremoniously shoved to the corner of the big sales floor by a bigger outfit who brazenly nabbed the idea and had the resources to go full-tilt with it…. Within two years!

The good guys had no fall-back position and no fresh ideas, as all their time and money had been spent on chasing that “Hey, I’ve got a patent” concept. Eventually, most of them accepted full-time jobs at the firm which nabbed the invention, where they learned to keep their mouths shut and take that lovely paycheck home.

There isn’t much that would suck more than that.

Posted: November 13th, 2008 under Editorial - Opinion.
Comments: 13

Comments

Comment from Patrick McGrath
Time: December 27, 2008, 3:35 pm

Chris you have really hit the nail onthe head.
I keep thinking of Ralph Flood, who dreamed up the Tri-Cat hull configuration, and wrote a paper on it in a 1966 issue of the AYRS publication. His idea was taken up by a number of companys (like Incat for one), who produced wave piercing Tri-Cats in all sizes from huge ocean going car ferries to small power boats. They made millions. Ralph Flood remains forgotten.
Cheers. Patrick.

Comment from lunadadesign
Time: January 7, 2009, 5:14 pm

Thanks, Patrick…

I’ve watched so many people over the years who felt that they really needed to get themselves a patent. There was absolutely no way that they could ever pursue anyone who might have violated the patent because they didn’t have anything like the needed money to hire an attorney.

So, the patent certificate hung there, on the wall of their shop office like one of those plastic fish that sing and laugh.

Thanks for your comments and the poignant story about Ralph Flood.

Chris

Comment from Mike Waters
Time: January 17, 2009, 1:33 pm

Hi Chris
I drew up my first ‘invention’ about 55 years ago now and while I have a log book with about 100 things now, I only chose to patent one. That was now about 30 years ago and even then, it cost me about $5000 to ‘get the experience’ that you now write about. It was a concept for an ocean going integrated tug-barge and while models were made and the Canadian Dept of Transport showed interest, noboby would put down the big money to go further with it.
Well, no one in North America that is. But with a few small changes, the Scandinavians soon had similar rigs operating and my patent would have been useless anyway. (Luckily for me, the company I worked for at the time, took over the patent and they then picked up the tab).
After speaking with a lawyer friend in the UK about this whole ‘patent game’ while I was still a teenager, he suggested something interesting to me that I will share.
He said that if you DO ever chose to go to court to defend an idea, the thing you have to prove is that YOU were the first one to conceive the particular idea. A patent is certainly one way to do that … but there is a much simpler way.
There are so-called RECORD books, which are solidly-bound books generally with plain lined paper and all pages are pre-numbered. The idea is that you enter your ideas with sketches, notes and dates etc and as one follows the other in chronological order and numbered pages, you are able to prove the approach time when you created the idea. It’s only approximate of course, but it’s still of potential value.
So I started that when I was 18 and now have about 100 entries with everyone from unique bow-thrusters to ski-boot warmers ;-) At least it’s fun and it makes a book that perhaps someone one day will discover and smile over … somewhat like those fascinating pages by da Vinci.
Another approach is to Patent it Yourself and there’s a good book published by NOLO Press on that very subject. But it’s a lot of work and there are some crazy rules to follow. As you imply Chris, it could all be a LOT simpler but old traditions seem to die slowly. It’s interesting though, that some companies now INSIST that you come to them with a patent when presenting something new. They want to know what you claim is unique … but with the ease of breaking a patent, I still remain sceptical. But I have a pretty good concept for new series hybrid electric car that I drafted out in 1993, and although still, no one is building anything quite like it, I cannot get an existing company to even LOOK at it without a patent. But if I had one, I am sure they would simply take it, change a few things and I’d be lucky to get a hand-shake. The only way is to build a prototype, parade it in front of the head office of some car builder and force them to get serious. Sadly, a lot of great ideas are being wasted today, simply because the system does not encourage ideas to be shared and developed by those with the funds to do so. It’s all very much an ‘in-house’ thing … regardless of the industry. I have a workable idea for low-cost transport using existing rail lines, yet even companies like Bombardier simply say, “we do all our R&D in house and have no interest to see what you have without a patent”. Anyway, thanks for spelling it out … I’ll stay with my Record Book for now ;-)
cheers
mike

PS (not for publication Chris … but I’d appreciate to have more info on your Z65 trimaran that I’d like to write about for an article on my website. Your proposed construction etc etc)

Comment from Michael
Time: January 20, 2009, 7:58 pm

I have also been through this process. I came up with an idea for a new kind of folding kayak (simple, cheap, superlightweight, folds in 1min) and after a year of prototypes I tried to get a patent ($6000) and a year later (and another dozen prototypes) I found out it was not patentable and the lawyer wanted another $2500 to take another stab at it. I realized that even if I got a valid patent it would be relatively easy to change a few things about it to get around the patent, and like you don’t have the megabucks to chase an infringer anyway.

I now think that the way to go is to get the idea out in the world and try to get as much publicity as you can so you have a head start on the copiers. Make your big bucks in the first year and then when the copies come out slash your price to stop them from getting any of your marketshare, meanwhile you come out with the next generation. Rinse and repeat as needed.
I am currently ironing out some production details and setting up manufacturing. Hopefully I will be selling thousands of these things by the summer.

Comment from lunadadesign
Time: January 21, 2009, 6:58 am

Hi Mike,

Your letter is a powerful testament to the driving burn of invention. It seems to be a thing that is “just there” for a small group of folks who’s minds never rest. You are very much one of those guys and I share your joy in the process.

I just got your email and I’ll respond to your interest in the Z65 as soon as I dig myself out of a small pile of obligations.

Best,

Chris

Comment from lunadadesign
Time: January 21, 2009, 7:06 am

Hey Michael,

I can really relate to that second paragraph of yuors about the alternate process for bringing a small production item to the marketplace.

The patent process can be a weird and convoluted maze of thoughts and pure outlay of cash; sometimes good and sometimes not so good.

I wish you all the best in your folding kayak endeavor and would be excited to here how things are going as you get closer to your unveiling. Feel free to write me directly as I’d like to hear how things are going for you.

Best,

Chris

Comment from Roger Loving
Time: February 1, 2009, 6:17 am

Chris, I have to disagree. I’ve been the inventor as well as the author on patents dozens of times….both the solo and group type. It is not difficult to learn how to write a patent and to do the required drawings.
Patents are easy to do and a source of pride to most people. That’s value right there. The patent process assigns the inventor the legal right to a short period of exclusivity, and offers in exchange to publish the invention for the benefit of the public good. Please note that publication happens to everyone’s advantage no matter how an inventor chooses to exercise the exclusivity.
Protecting one’s rights is a whole different subject from the patent process.
Thank you, Roger Loving

Comment from lunadadesign
Time: February 1, 2009, 10:46 am

Thanks for your comments, Roger. I do understand the position from which you are making your comments. I’m happy that you have had such a positive experience with your patent process efforts and wish you all the good fortune you may be able to harvest from your efforts.

1. You do not consider it hard to write your own patent. That is highly commendable, but perhaps you may wish to consider that most folks do not have a solid level of control over their own mother tongue, much less apply themselves to learn another with different sentence structure and grammatical nuance. Go read the postings that are put up on the average discussion forum and you’ll see that the desire to communicate has far outstripped the ability of the average person to actually write that need with any kind of accomplished skill. It’s even worse to expect them to be able to write a patent application and support it with a long list of arcane descriptions.

2. The assigned exclusivity of the patent is only as good as the willingness and financial ability of the holder to defend that right in court. If the holder can not, or chooses to not, defend the right, then the patent becomes instantly useless as a tool of anything exclusive. The claims are moot without a pursuit of defending the process.

3. Publication only serves those who would choose to produce their own version of said patentable item. It gives anyone of them a dandy target for making their own version, just different enough that they can easily get around the patent claims of the original holder.

4. Protecting one’s rights are totally and inextricably intertwined with the patenting process. Without a protection process from the original holder, the patent is virtually non-functional. This process can range from the kindly worded initial communication, to the full-on court business of filing suit. Nevertheless, it is connected completely and has no reason to exist without the original patent. One does not go out and sue people for creating their own product unless there is a function of the law from which they can operate in the first place. Hence, the patent and the defense of same go hand in hand.

Maybe you are one of the fortunate folks who have the financial wherewithal to pursue the individuals, or companies, that swipe your patented ideas for their own gain. Believe me, it makes me happy if that is the case. Unfortunately, the vast majority of those who have patents issued each year are not so well endowed financially and, as a result, they can only sit and watch as they are functionally ripped-off by someone else.

Thank you for your contribution here, Roger. It’s always good to hear from the other side of the argument and I wish you great success in your efforts.

Best Regards,

Chris Ostlind

Comment from Thom D
Time: March 10, 2009, 7:05 pm

I think one thing that a patent can do for you is protect your right to use the invention yourself. It is always framed as a how do I commercialize the invention and stop the idea from being stolen thing. As you point out theft/evolution is a given, but if you don’t at least get a patent you may not always be able to use the idea yourself. I think that mainly affects someone who is in a market, but possibly not to a large extent. I know of one situation where a guy partnered with a larger company to get his product made precisely so they would defend the patent, while he carried on making the crafty version of the same thing as before.

If one doesn’t have any commercial interest, then it is mainly an ego thing. The ego drive is getting pretty thin these days, as the patent office issues patents with the gusto of a Mortgage broker pre-crash.

*****************************

Agreed, Thom. To me, it all comes down to the best place to spend the available cash. Being a guy from working class roots, I tend to avoid attorneys as much as is possible.

Chris O

Comment from Samuel Schneider
Time: March 15, 2009, 10:07 am

I thought it was funny when Bladerider tried to patent everything under the sun, all of which they “borrowed” from the development Moth community. Glad none of it went through.
********************
Me too, Sam. They are a fairly aggressive outfit, no?

Chris O

Comment from Chuck Leinweber
Time: March 25, 2009, 10:34 pm

Chris. I think I have told you before that I worked as a patternmaker and modelmaker for 25 years before I got this web gig. In that time, I came in contact and did work for a number of inventors and patent holders. Like you, I got some of their money and later saw them all fall on their faces. I don’t think I ever saw a single successful patented idea. I have seen ideas successfully developed, however – it is just that those guys did not fool with patents.
Chuck

Comment from Bruce Dillahunty
Time: July 21, 2009, 8:26 pm

Funny how I seem to follow Chuck around sometimes :-)

Seriously, great site and I really enjoyed this article. I had been at a bookstore tonight and considered checking out the “how to get a patent” books on an idea I have, but couldn’t face it.

Maybe its best if I don’t face it at all :-)

Put a link to you on my site, for what it’s worth.

http://www.craftacraft.com/lunada_design

***************************************

Hi Bruce,

Thanks for the note and my apologies for not getting to the correspondence sooner. The patent game is a curious enterprise and not for the feint hearted as costs and realities lurk around every corner.

Thanks for the link as it all helps.

Chris

Comment from Tony Ellen
Time: October 7, 2009, 12:48 am

In short the Farrier folder check the patents lodged as he developed his design some I’ve found he has not used but they must block others development so even though he has developed further advances and patented them he has chosen not to use them (yet)
Is this not a true case of a master mind using a patent to its fullest potential?
Look forward to views.
Tony

Write a comment