Showing posts with label inventions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label inventions. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 23, 2013

The Patentista on the New Innovator's Dilemma

The Patentista decided we needed a coffee and the usual home/office brew wasn't going to work so a walk to the nearest espresso emporium was in order.  The Patentista likes being around the freelancing denizens of the Laptopistan viewing them as figuring out the next big thing.  Folks with the next big thing usually need someone who knows a bit about intellectual property at some point.  A good thing for the Patentista.  After getting settled in among the throng of connected folks, the Patentista related a recent conversation had with a leading computer scientist and some technology transfer types on the new innovator's dilemma.

The computer scientist was worried.  It seems that many of his most talented students and protégés were not executing on their innovations or their talent.  It seems that several forces are at foot.  First there is the matter of student loans.  The young and naive and their aspirational parents felt it was worth going out on a limb financially to make sure that their kids could go to school.  As the loans were mounting, no one realized that every $4.35 latte paid for with student loan money was going to have to be paid back from future dollars with lots of interest on top.  The parents and the students never sat down and figured out what the monthly payment was going to be when the budding computer scientists graduated and went into the workforce.  These loans cost serious money on top of housing, food, healthcare (even on the parents plans), and living expenses.  When faced with the after graduation choice of joining a starving entrepreneurial venture where there risk and rewards for success were high along with the potential that the whole thing would implode and the payroll checks might stop versus a more stable corporate gig, only those students with financial resources could take a risk on the risky venture.  (The Patentista pointed out that not all start-ups have venture capital money behind them from Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.)  So the potential innovators were buried somewhere.  While there was the potential that they would use their skills in corporate America, the odds of a truly disruptive invention coming from that locale was slim.  A least not anytime soon.

Then their is the university spin-out entrepreneurial adventure.  Few of the innovations created by leading graduate level engineering and medical program were making it to the commercialization phase.  The program, designed to have engineers and doctors spend a year in each other's shoes figuring out technical ways to solve pressing medical problems and how to instill medical approaches to engineering had a serious entrepreneurial element.  Identify a compelling project.  Write up the business plans.  Do the research to see if the invention is patentable, figure out all the FDA and other regulatory issues that would impact commercialization, figure out how to make it and support it.  The folks at the university also found this troubling.  But what was up here?

It turned out that the program was expensive.  Even with a scholarship, most of the participants were already in their mid-20s by the time they started and finished the year long adventure.  At the end of the program there was tremendous pressure from parents and the looming student loans to "get a real job."  Because the program didn't have a path that included helping the participants actually get their business up and running or provide funding for salaries post-completion (the participants had graduate stipends while they were in the program) as the program came close to an end, everyone was job hunting.  The Patentista rued the lost potential of those innovations which might just sit in some university repository but never get taken out for a real trial run to see if they were viable.  Again a situation where economic pressures and fear of the marketplace was hindering innovation.  While the university could license the technology, it wasn't the same as having the minds who created the technology finish the job.

The conversation moved on.  Instead of the people working in Laptopistan, what about the folks behind the espresso machine?  The Patentista asked a simple question, "how many of these baristas have more than one job?"  The answer was pretty easy - most of them.  The digital videographer and technologist with great ideas is working on her new technology/videography projects as a stinger for a leading newspaper.  They kind of get her work but are more interested in her superior editing and content skills.  She gets a small fee, the use of their equipment, and the ability to create her own YouTube channel to showcase her work. (They are generous with the shared copyright.) After that almost 30 hour gig, she does another 20 hours foaming milk and making coffee drinks because, well, she needs the insurance.  So after two jobs and 50 hours a week or more of work, there is little time for developing her own work or saving enough money to start her own firm.  Same with the firmware designer-barista who has figured out a new way to stop hackers, or the anime artist with ideas about new ways to use avatars in commercial advertising.

Not everyone can pick up and move to Silicon Valley.  People have to pay their bills and fix their cars, and pay their student loans.  And the universities are not much help.  They aren't setting expectations on the economics of getting a new millennium college degree or the impact of staying in college for six years instead of four.  And these are the kids getting the science and technology degrees.  What about the art majors?

The same is true for technology programs away from major hubs where economic development gurus ask the question, "how can we get these kids to stay here and develop their ideas?"  Same story - even though there is an ample supply of old brick buildings with lots of high speed internet and other resources, the young scientists and technologists have to go where the jobs are.  The Patentista fears that the best minds might be doing identify management in the server room of some big company.

The Patentista and the computer scientist are chagrined.  How can we nurture the next generation of innovators if everyone is making coffee, working two jobs, worried about their student loans and getting healthcare once they turn 27, and getting heat from their parents to get a "real job." (A real concern for patents in these challenging economic times.)  What we need is for the ideas to fly, for these people to do their own thing, to innovate.  After all, a social media search engine optimization wasn't even a job 10 years ago.  (And, the Patentista, always the realist, noted that these are the future clients.)  These people are in their prime - now is the time.

So there it is.  The new innovators dilemma.  How to we free them up so that they can innovate?  It's going to take a lot more coffee to figure that one out.

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Answers to Some Basic Questions


A reader posed some basic questions in response to our "Commercialization Conundrum" post. The questions and our replies follow.
What is a US Patent?
A patent is a property right that grants an inventor exclusive rights to use/sell/manufacture their invention for a specified period of time in exchange for “teaching” others about his invention and how it works.
A patent is obtained by filing a patent application with the United States Patent and Trademark Office which outlines the specific guidelines determining what is patentable in the US.  (See Way Better Patents' Glossary for more info.)
A patent obtained in another country?
A patent obtained in a foreign country protects the inventor’s intellectual property (the invention) in that country).  It protects against an American inventor importing products that infringe the patent into that country.
But, there's more...
A US patent prevents a foreign manufacturer from importing products into the US that infringe a US patent.  But, the inventor/patent holder needs to enforce the patent without the help of the USPTO.  The USPTO gives you the patent, you have to enforce it yourself (or with the support of top notch IP attorneys.)
What rights do patents provide for the patent holder?
The patent holder is entitled to exclusive use of their invention.  The right conferred by the patent grant is, in the language of the statute (patent laws - this is what it means when patent lawyers say stuff like, "It's statutory.") and the language of the patent itself, "the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling" the invention in the United States or "importing" the invention into the United States.
What does a patent applicant give up to obtains these rights?
A patent holder gives up the rights to keep details of the invention secret.  The inventor receives a patent in exchange for disclosing how the invention works or what it does. Basically the inventor publicly discloses how an invention works (aka - teaches) and gets exclusive rights to use/sell/manufacture your invention for 20 years after the filing date of your patent application (the current term).
Is it really worth getting and defending a patent? Coca Cola, arguably one of the most successful businesses in the world, appears to value trade secrets more that certain patents. But they also vigorously protect their trademark.
Patents and trademarks - the intellectual property equivalent of apples and oranges - event though Apple has lots of both, but we digress.
Patents are good for some things, trade secrets are good for others, trademarks are totally different but are intellectual property too.
  • See the work of Thomas Edison, original patent troll, and Nikola Tesla inventor of Alternating Current.  Both guys had patents but had different strategies.
  • Ask Mr. Bezos how much money Amazon is making from Barnes and Noble and others for licensing fees related to the single action ordering system patent US Patent 5,960,411  (We'll discuss the reexamination where on-demand purchases using your cable TV remote control resulted in big changes to the claims in one-click land.)
  • And for Elias Howe the sewing machine business was pretty good.  It took a five year patent battle but eventually his invention was declared "basic"  (essential or seminal in today's patent lingo) and Mr. Howe was awarded a royalty for every machine that infringed his patent. Patent wars are not new they are just more public thanks to the internet.  The sewing machine war is pretty interesting though.
  • The late An Wang sold his patent for core memory to IBM to raise money forhis firm and then WANG Laboratories changed the way we create documents and worked in an office forever.  WANG Laboratories invented the technology for Object Linking and Embedding (OLE) which it sold to Microsoft in exchange for a $90M investment.  All this internet stuff with pictures with links is OLE on steroids.
  • If Coca-Cola had a patent strategy instead of a trade secret strategy the company wouldn’t have its $167 billion market capitalization and we’d all be drinking “coke” with labels that say Walmart, Stop & Shop, or Mom's Kitchen. Much of Coke's value is in it's branding which protects with its trademarks.  By the way, one part of the formula is out there.  Since high fructose corn syrup, one of the ingredients in Coke, is a grain product by Kosher standards, regular Coke isn't kosher for Passover.  But, Coke replaces the high fructose corn syrup with cane sugar during Passover.  Lots of folks buy Coke by the case at that time of year because a lot of health nuts (in addition to Passover celebrants) prefer cane sugar in their soda.
  • It’s just like the recipe for Oreos. Nabisco, a division of Kraft Food is celebrating the 100th anniversary of their product this year. If they had patented the recipe rather than keeping it as a trade secret, they wouldn’t be making billions selling them since every Tom, Dick and Harry could copy the recipe.  
But just because it's in the patent doesn't mean it works.  Negative know-how (trade secrets that define what doesn’t work) also enters ino this equation. See our earlier post on Tabasco and the Extra Ingredient. Sometimes the patent isn’t always a complete view of the invention, but we may not know it at the time.
Keep the questions coming.


Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Some Thoughts on Inventors as Lexographers


Inventor Lexographer

On New Words

'If the inventory of ready-made words in our language determines which concepts you are able to understand, how would you ever learn anything new?'

Guy Deutscher, Honorary Research Fellow, School of Languages, Linguistics, and Cultures at the University of Manchester.

On Words and Inventions

"...a patentee or applicant is free to be his or her own lexicographer, a patentee or applicant may use terms in a manner contrary to or inconsistent with one or more of their ordinary meanings if the written description clearly redefines the terms."
USPTO Manual of Patent Examination