"I can see the big picture advantages, but for an early stage startup is it really a good decision. "
My short answer is no. The long answer is probably not. Note: I don't know your circumstances. The chances that you actually have the patent in alignment with what the technology actually should be to be successful so early on is very slim. You've effectively patenting the wrong thing, almost by definition. Save the money, spend it on testing the product and getting paying customers. Mick "Some of my best friends are lawyers" Liubinskas On Feb 24, 2:59 pm, drllau <drlawrence...@gmail.com> wrote: > The interplay between commercialisation and IP is not always obvious, > given that the market gorillas tend to have more resources than a > startup some consideration of tactics may be worthwhile. The tricky > thing about SaaS is that much of the IP can be copyrighted or treated > as trade secrets, the major benefit is that these are either automatic > (provded correct legal notices retained) and low-cost (assuming you've > got appropriate employee policies and hide the IP adequately). When > considering thre business aspects, ask yourself > > a) is the idea incremental, a feature or just mere technical knowledge > (no inventive component)? consider defensive publication (some > companies find the most obscure foreign journal just to set a date) or > just describe it openly in your marketing lit (this prevents others > from squatting on something "obvious") > > b) is it the basis for a product-line or range of services? Consider > either trade secret or provisional patenting as others described. Keep > in mind that patents only apply when you sell, offer to sell, > manufacture or distribute the product (legacy of industrial age legal > machinery). If the software service is purely a hosted backend > internal process then many of the trade aspects are simply not > relevant. On the other hand if you are considered licensing out, > borrowing money, combining with other software, or letting third > parties have some limited rights then some form of IPR protection is > strongly recommended. Also consider a combination of IPR including > trade marking the solution space, being vertically integrated (if > selling appliances) and the new anti-counterfeiting laws. > > c) Is it going to be the basis of an entire new business? In which > case having full patent protection reassures investor(s) that you have > secured the global market ahead of time. When creating debt based > instruments over IP, the stronger the better. > > Obviously the precise tactics depend on your budget and inclination. > Hersay is that twitter didn't create a patent over their original idea > of microblogging but still managed to build an eco-system around > it ... often time to market and just simply speed of execution > outweighs any competitor legal maneuvers (though watch out for > submarine or cuckold patents). > > Lawrencehttp://nz.linkedin.com/in/drllau > > On Feb 23, 10:11 am, Guy Tucker <astut...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > As a registered patent attorney it's good to get this kind of > > feedback. > > > Just to clarify, filing a provisional patent application will NOT stop > > you from infringing other's patents. These are two separate issues. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Silicon Beach Australia mailing list. Guidelines on discussion: http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia/msg/351e183e1303508d?hl=en%3Fhl%3Den No lurkers! It is expected that you introduce yourself. To post to this group, send email to silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to silicon-beach-australia+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia?hl=en?hl=en
