Patent cost?

[Nightjar]

The important point is whether 'very similar to what I described' amounts to being sufficiently different to be patentable in its own right.

Colin Bignell

[Chris J Dixon]

Am I alone in being curious about the actual subject?

Chris

[John Williamson]

I corrected that for you.

[Adrian]

That was a rhetorical question, right?

[Peter Crosland]

It is certainly worth shopping him to the Patent Office.

[Fredxxx]

If I were you I would write to the person involved and suggest he submits a joint patent with you.

Without your agreement, his patent would be utterly worthless, with your agreement there's a fighting chance it might stand have some value.

To be honest, since you published details, the patent wouldn't stand if anyone found these details in the public domain.

I also suspect it is pure bluster on the guy's part to spoil any successful copy.

If you think he can seed a market for this gadget, then manufacture your own or threaten to do do so, and sell the gadget to all his customers.

[PeterC]

If it's likely to be commercially non-viable, why not let him go ahead and lose the money? If it is successful, point out to others in the same field the prior art and let a big company spoil his party. Sometimes you have to be cruel to be cruel!

[Chris J Dixon]

Apparently not. ;-)

Chris

[meow2222]

Its not hard to stay within the law, its just a business offer

NT

[tim......]

as the Op said that his original has been "published" what could be lost by publishing it again?

tim

[SteveW]

I thought that once you have revealed it to anyone without a non-disclosure agreement in place it is unpatentable. As you have published it already, no-one including yourself should be able to patent it.

SteveW

[Adrian]

The obvious, if cruel, response would be "Harry's credibility".

[Chris Hogg]

In the distant past, publication of details of the invention _anywhere_ before the patent application was made was sufficient to make the invention unpatentable. IANAPL but I have a feeling that the Patent Office is a little more flexible these days. Publication has to be in a place that can be reasonably accessed by the general public, for a patent to be refused. Previously, a description of the invention in something like The Mongolian Yak-herder's Weekly would have constituted publication, but I think that these days the patent examiner might deem that such a publication, in an obscure language in a remote country and in a little known magazine with limited availability, did not constitute publication. A lot depends on where the OP published the description of his gadget (and on the mood of the patent examiner!).

[GB]

That's what I was told by a patent agent 40 years ago (when I was thinking of becoming one!).

A corporation that did not want to patent an idea would publish it in an obscure place, so as to stymie others whilst not handing them the information on a plate.

[tim......]

But there's obscure places and obscure places

ISTR that the journal has to be relevant, and certainly in English, but it doesn't have to be widely circulated

tim

[Chris Hogg]

Yes, I was told exactly the same thing. Must be true. But I'm not so sure it's the same today.

>

[dennis]

Oi that's what I used to use for my Wii board. However I have improved on that and use a piece of MDF now.

[dennis]

Or vice versa.. Intel's apic "infringed" a patent I had for interrupt control to multiple CPUs, we (GEC) never saw a penny (some silly sod forgot to renew it).

[John Williamson]

In the language of the country where the patent is being sought, I'd have thought? Although English is commonly understood in most countries.

[Fredxxx]

Why just in English? A publication of patentable idea means it's published and so cannot/should not be valid.