Got an idea for this little device for those who still spin vinyl. They are out there. They got money.
This is similar to a KAB filter but better (I think), designed to get rid o f rumble and a good bit of acoustic feedback if it is significant. I'm pret ty sure I can do it with 2 dual OP AMPs, some resistors and caps and power it with a wall wart so no dealing with UL.
Probably about $ 35 to build including the wall wart. Almost for sure I can get a bit more than double that, they got the money and don't care. Actual ly I would probably sell more by jacking up the price. They pay ten grand f or a TT, five grand for an arm, maybe three grand on a cartridge and anothe r few grand on a dedicated phono preamp. There is a possibility they would be more eager to buy it at twice the price, seriously.
I ran into that when I was in business. My prices were good, warranty longe r but ONLY on what was done. So a customer gets the price and says "What, t here was nothing wrong with it ?". "No, it was done in ten minutes with abo ut five bucks in parts so I didn't charge you $ 200, I could rewrite the bi ll if you want. How much would you like to contribute to my beer fund ?". Y es, I would say that to a customer and they loved it. I guess I looked more like a normal person. I never advertised, but I would get calls "Remember Doug Jones ? He gave me your number, I have a Sylvania...". "Jones, umm, he has a Sylvania too right ?". "Yes, and he spoke highly of his so I bought one, now it's broke".
Anyway, enough anecdote. So say if I am best off jacking up the price and m aking a killing on these things, should I bother with a patent ? This is so mething that is similar to something that has been done but with different parameters. Even if i encapsulated it, by external measurements its exact M O could be determined and copied cheaply in China. A patent would make even that little bit of reverse engineering unnecessary.
Now, another angle on this. let's say I get the design done. Usenet is not widely viewed. If I had say a spice text file I post here, would that estab lish prior art at least enough to prevent someone else from patenting my de sign ? A permanent record, hell people throw things in my face that I poste d 20 years ago drunk. (on SER anyway)
There are a bunch of people watching patents, both for enforcement and for stealing ideas. Even a provisional puts it right in their lap. Without that they may never even hear about this device because the market is limited. It's just that the pockets are so deep. Like I said, I think it possible I would sell more at $ 200 than $ 100.
Recently I had a look at JT's site. He has what, a dozen or two patents ? w ell of course he has had more jobs than that so obviously much of it is sim ply not worth patenting, not because it is worthless, it is just that a pat ent would be worthless.
of rumble and a good bit of acoustic feedback if it is significant. I'm pr etty sure I can do it with 2 dual OP AMPs, some resistors and caps and powe r it with a wall wart so no dealing with UL.
an get a bit more than double that, they got the money and don't care. Actu ally I would probably sell more by jacking up the price. They pay ten grand for a TT, five grand for an arm, maybe three grand on a cartridge and anot her few grand on a dedicated phono preamp. There is a possibility they woul d be more eager to buy it at twice the price, seriously.
ger but ONLY on what was done. So a customer gets the price and says "What, there was nothing wrong with it ?". "No, it was done in ten minutes with a bout five bucks in parts so I didn't charge you $ 200, I could rewrite the bill if you want. How much would you like to contribute to my beer fund ?". Yes, I would say that to a customer and they loved it. I guess I looked mo re like a normal person. I never advertised, but I would get calls "Remembe r Doug Jones ? He gave me your number, I have a Sylvania...". "Jones, umm, he has a Sylvania too right ?". "Yes, and he spoke highly of his so I bough t one, now it's broke".
making a killing on these things, should I bother with a patent ? This is something that is similar to something that has been done but with differen t parameters. Even if i encapsulated it, by external measurements its exact MO could be determined and copied cheaply in China. A patent would make ev en that little bit of reverse engineering unnecessary.
t widely viewed. If I had say a spice text file I post here, would that est ablish prior art at least enough to prevent someone else from patenting my design ? A permanent record, hell people throw things in my face that I pos ted 20 years ago drunk. (on SER anyway)
r stealing ideas. Even a provisional puts it right in their lap. Without th at they may never even hear about this device because the market is limited . It's just that the pockets are so deep. Like I said, I think it possible I would sell more at $ 200 than $ 100.
well of course he has had more jobs than that so obviously much of it is s imply not worth patenting, not because it is worthless, it is just that a p atent would be worthless.
I guess the first question is, if it could be copied so easily, what makes you think this circuit could be patented? More important would be to preve nt someone else from claiming a patent. File the short form patent for $30
0 which establishes prior art unambiguously.
If you really think it could sell - spend the $35 on the circuit and anothe r $100 on the case, gold plated connectors, etc (no way use a standard wall wart, get something that looks the part) and charge $499. Even if you sel l fewer, you will still make more money with the larger markup. Also, to m ake the circuit hard to copy, add a number of extraneous parts and more tha n one circuit board. Connect them in different ways in different copies of the units you ship so you can track who bought the units that were copied. A small MCU could be programmed to immediately shut down and turn off all internal oscillators but must have run for a bit to enable the rest of the circuit on power up and connect the unused I/Os to the rest of the circuit in random ways. They will have a harder time copying that if they can't f igure out what it does... maybe.
If someone else (with deep pockets) is paying for the patent, sure go ahead and file a patent. Else, don't bother. You haven't the money to defend the patent and everyone knows it.
of rumble and a good bit of acoustic feedback if it is significant. I'm pr etty sure I can do it with 2 dual OP AMPs, some resistors and caps and powe r it with a wall wart so no dealing with UL.
an get a bit more than double that, they got the money and don't care. Actu ally I would probably sell more by jacking up the price. They pay ten grand for a TT, five grand for an arm, maybe three grand on a cartridge and anot her few grand on a dedicated phono preamp. There is a possibility they woul d be more eager to buy it at twice the price, seriously.
ger but ONLY on what was done. So a customer gets the price and says "What, there was nothing wrong with it ?". "No, it was done in ten minutes with a bout five bucks in parts so I didn't charge you $ 200, I could rewrite the bill if you want. How much would you like to contribute to my beer fund ?". Yes, I would say that to a customer and they loved it. I guess I looked mo re like a normal person. I never advertised, but I would get calls "Remembe r Doug Jones ? He gave me your number, I have a Sylvania...". "Jones, umm, he has a Sylvania too right ?". "Yes, and he spoke highly of his so I bough t one, now it's broke".
making a killing on these things, should I bother with a patent ? This is something that is similar to something that has been done but with differen t parameters. Even if i encapsulated it, by external measurements its exact MO could be determined and copied cheaply in China. A patent would make ev en that little bit of reverse engineering unnecessary.
t widely viewed. If I had say a spice text file I post here, would that est ablish prior art at least enough to prevent someone else from patenting my design ? A permanent record, hell people throw things in my face that I pos ted 20 years ago drunk. (on SER anyway)
r stealing ideas. Even a provisional puts it right in their lap. Without th at they may never even hear about this device because the market is limited . It's just that the pockets are so deep. Like I said, I think it possible I would sell more at $ 200 than $ 100.
well of course he has had more jobs than that so obviously much of it is s imply not worth patenting, not because it is worthless, it is just that a p atent would be worthless.
Rumbly decks went away a very long time ago, unless you buy crap or faulty equipment. And trying to sell a rumble filter to someone that's paid far to o much for a deck is going to be a very hard sell. So I'm not sure of the v alue of that bit.
Your markup is way too low, aim for nearer 6x. And the case should cost mor e than the circuit.
A patent isn't worth much unless you've got the funds to defend it. Even th en it's time consuming & expensive to do so. It's a wealthy company's game. Applying for one then dropping it should at least prevent someone else pat enting it. Listing the spice file in usenet doesn't - it gets you useful ev idence but that's all.
I think nowadays patents are something either billion dollar corporations or hacks worry about. IIRC JT had the clout of Motorola's legal department behind his patents who you got?
Try to ensure it doesn't infringe on any _current_ patents and if not and you think there's a a market just make it, sell it, see what happens. If it's not a hot seller probably no one will bother to copy it and you maybe get a small revenue stream from time to time, like that guy who writes a tube design blog and sells PCB kits of novel designs pretty sure he doesn't patent any of his stuff.
If it's absurdly popular the Chinese will probably knock it off. Okay you make 100k instead of 1 mil. so it goes, that's the breaks in life. Onto the next thing
If you want to make a living in the audio/recording/music industry and you have a lot of good ideas unfortunately I think one has to come to an acceptance that someone else who didn't really do much will always make more money off your ideas than you do. Ego will drive a guy to throw himself out a window like Howard Armstrong over patents unless one can come to some kind of acceptance of how things are and forget about that Howard Roark fairy-tale BS.
If all goes well OP will make 1 million dollars from his invention and someone else will make 50 from it. Like the old joke about med student who graduates last in his class what do you call a millionaire with only one unit of millions? "Millionaire"
You draw the line at whether you have paying customers. Don't ever "invent" something unless you know you have customers!
That said, in order to patent anything, it must be novel (new), useful, non
-obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and not in a restricted class (i.e., nuclear bombs, etc..)
Without even knowing the details of what you believe you have "invented", r ecord players and audio-electronics in general are very mature technologies . As such, don't expect tremendous innovation. "Inventions" are likely to be tiny, incremental advances in the art. And if that's true in your case, will the affirmative protections of a granted patent be commercially viabl e for you?
Expect to pay a few thousand dollars (and loads of hours) if you try to rol l the patent on your own, and maybe 2x-5x that if you hire an attorney, dra ftsman, etc.. Then sit back and wait a couple years (minimum) for your fi rst office action - which no doubt will be a Section-102, -103 or -106 reje ction and maybe all 3.
At $35, or even $200, how many widgets would you have sell to break even?
BTW: To correct what another posted said - filing a "short form" patent (tr anslation: provisional application) does NOT "establish prior art unambiguo usly". At best, it establishes the date of your invention (assuming you la ter file a successful non-provisional application within one year -- and do n't make mistakes in your provisional which render the earlier date inappli cable.) And if you want to file for international patent protections (more $$$), going the provisional route has some very serious implications you n eed to consider (for example, to avoid adding new material in the later non
-provisional). All of which, tend to make the provisional problematic. It 's just as much work, you may as well file the real deal and save a few buc ks.
Disclaimer: I converted all my vinyl to MP3's years ago. :)
on-obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and not in a restricte d class (i.e., nuclear bombs, etc..)
record players and audio-electronics in general are very mature technologi es. As such, don't expect tremendous innovation. "Inventions" are likely t o be tiny, incremental advances in the art. And if that's true in your cas e, will the affirmative protections of a granted patent be commercially via ble for you?
oll the patent on your own, and maybe 2x-5x that if you hire an attorney, d raftsman, etc.. Then sit back and wait a couple years (minimum) for your first office action - which no doubt will be a Section-102, -103 or -106 re jection and maybe all 3.
translation: provisional application) does NOT "establish prior art unambig uously".
If you invented something new that no one else has, the provisional patent application absolutely *does* establish prior art. The invention is docume nted in an application, so at that point no one can claim they invented it since this provisional application documents it in a public manner.
I was told this by a patent attorney who was giving a lecture to our IEEE g roup. He was full of little nuggets like this.
le a successful non-provisional application within one year -- and don't ma ke mistakes in your provisional which render the earlier date inapplicable. )
going the provisional route has some very serious implications you need to consider (for example, to avoid adding new material in the later non-provis ional). All of which, tend to make the provisional problematic. It's just as much work, you may as well file the real deal and save a few bucks.
All of this is only useful if you are working toward a patent which the OP is not.
I think an explanation with it should be in order and it's key salient points of the invention.
If someone else thought of the idea (US only) in the past 6 or is it 12 months and can prove it, then they can still patent the idea? In the US it is the inventor who owns the patent, not the writer of the patent.
Europe is different.
BICBW
A patent has the effect of dissuading competition. Even a badly worded patent you have no intention of supporting in court stops other relevant patents and dissuades anyone else from copying your invention.
--
Mike Perkins
Video Solutions Ltd
www.videosolutions.ltd.uk
Almost certainly not. Patent examiners confine themselves very largely to the patent literature for prior art searches. Once the patent issues, you can do various things about it, such as applying for an
*inter partes* review and/or bringing suit in federal court, but that requires real money. Filing a provisional is a much better idea.
Not any more. The US went to a first-to-file system ages ago.
Plus or minus. If you have a valuable patent but can't afford to enforce it against some large company, nowadays there are lots of options, such as:
Sell it outright to a Non-Practicing Entity. NPEs are very dangerous opponents in patent litigation, because they're immune to counterassertion risk, i.e. they don't make anything so they can't infringe your patents. That neutralizes one of the most powerful defenses in patent litigation.
Get a large legal firm to take it on a contingent-fee basis. This also works best if you can't be countersued.
Sell part of it to a NPE.
Variations on the above.
Of course none of these things will fly if the patent isn't obviously very valuable.
NPEs get a lot of bad press, but their existence is an important safeguard for individual inventors IME--they create a secondary market for intellectual property, and can aggregate patents to make a very strong position.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
art at least enough to prevent someone else from patenting my design ?"
It doesn't stop other patents and in fact can promote further patents. In fact, that is the idea of patents, to get the information out there so othe rs can advance the field further. It is not uncommon for a patent to be gr anted only for others to file patents that depend on the first patent. Som etimes these follow on patents so improve on the initial patent that neithe r is truly useful without the other.
Right, most sensible people did that. I think one has gotta think carefully before trying to make money off audiophools. A lot of them have money, true. A lot of them also have white-hot internalized rage at their own pathology they're looking to project onto someone.
Building stuff for 'em is probably kind of its own worst punishment.
art at least enough to prevent someone else from patenting my design ?"
that depends. Most patents have no commercial value. Of the ones that do it 's mostly down to how valuable is it. Valuable game changer patents have ta rgets painted on them for everyone to shoot at - nothing dissuades those ex cept a legal team & plenty of visible funds.
I may have been unclear, but I'm not sure exactly how. Could you flesh out your query a bit?
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
Not sure what you mean here. If a patent is valuable, that means that it covers economically important subject matter and has enough substance (subject matter plus a sufficiently-early priority date) to stand up under intense scrutiny.
IANAL, but I've done about 20 expert cases to date, as well as having prosecuted a fair number of patents when I was at IBM.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
Actually I was questioning whether it is worth the trouble to get. I THINK I can write a pretty decent one but I think I would see a lawyer about it. I got one money lawyer who can probably tell if it is good, another is more into property n shit. Both very competent. The one more familiar with the patents might not take it on but refer me to someone else. He is not exactl y a patent lawyer.
group. He was full of little nuggets like this. "
I like nuggets.
onths and can prove it, then they can still patent the idea?"
Well the provisional last I heard was good for a year and was only $ 100. S o I guess if someone could prove prior art in that time it might void it ?
atent. "
Well it could be the inventor's employer. You have probably seen those empl oyment agreements they laughingly call contracts.
Maybe that's why many innovators were off the boat, they wouldn't make shit in the old country.
tops other relevant patents and dissuades anyone else from copying your inv ention."
Not that long ago, (to me that is ten years) a doctor started giving a spec ific set of drugs mixed to patients with a certain problem. It was effectiv e. Big pharma got wind of it and patented it, thus preventing him from usin g his own damn invention.
There could possibly be enough popular support among the customers to where they would buy from me, not the Chinese. These are well monied people. The y might do reviews and say "The cheap version sounded shrill and kinda stre ssed, but Jeff's device was as transparent as glass". And to get that I am going to have to pay attention to sound qualities that are barely quantifia ble with six figures worth of test equipment. I can plot and manipulate fre quency response, and I got one of the best distortion analysers on the plan et. It can be tweaked, you can do quite a bit within +/- 1 dB. So if I can have that edge, the main thing is to stop anyone from stopping me from sell ing them.
ing for an *inter partes* review and/or bringing suit in federal court, but that requires real money. "
That is beyond my knowldedge of the subject, I will have to look it up.
I read what he said am really wondering the same thing. The PCB isn't, hell none of it is designed except in my head. A lump sum is good for me. Sell the patent and probably not have to pay alot of tax on it. But I don't imag ine it gets me out of the footwork.
either is truly useful without the other. "
Cassettes and tape decks. They probably weren't separate but it is an examp le.
Yes, there are people watching all the time.
o others can advance the field further."
I disagree. While that may be considered a positive side effect I think the idea is to encourage innovators by guaranteeing they can make some money f rom their creativity. But who knows ?
carefully before trying to make money off audiophools. A lot of them have money, true. A lot of them also have white-hot internalized rage at th eir own pathology they're looking to project onto someone. "
I am an expert at dealing with such people. All I care for is a good review and I know how to get it, just tailor the high end and low end. Leave the rest of the spectrum alone. And if there is any distortion at all make it e ven order, in fact only 2nd is ideal.
o shoot at - nothing dissuades those except a legal team & plenty of visibl e funds. "
Well it is not that valuable. I MIGHT have a market of maybe a million out of seven billion. Companies in china want to make like ten million units. I f they did that with this more than half of them would rust to the boneyard like those Japanese cars back in the early 1970s. (remember that ?)
----- I appreciate all your responses. I still don't know whether to patent or no t, it is so simple, you can't patent a black box. I'm still listening but n ext I have to get the thing designed. One thing the audioaddicts might like is that I will draw the PC layout by hand, extolling the virtues of not ha ving sharp corners on the conductors. I would like to get some connectors f or point to point like Tektronix used to use, the ceramic ones that require the 2 % silver bearing solder.I really like those and the way they were us ed was much better than the norm of those binding terminals, but I can't fi nd them and maybe never will. The more I think about it the better a higher price sounds. If it is too cheap they will think there is nothing in it.
I won't call them audiophools. there are things I used to be able to hear, ad I had my preferences on sound, for a long time. They might be like me in some ways, for example, reusing a teabag is like a capital offense. In fac t I use a bunch of them and steep less. the tea is a hundred times better t hat way. Well that is how they are with audio. And I know for a fact that e ven among people with "normal" hearing, people hear differently. That, I th ink, accounts for much of the personal preferences, like one who has five s ubwoofers, and the other who listens to some small bookshelf speakers and l oves the sound with no really strong bass.
I have my own preferences, unfortunately since my hearing is starting to go , that includes about 17 dB boost from about 7 KHz and up. Not shelving.
Basically I know the market pretty well and have been looking for SOMETHING . This may be it. Sooner or later I have to get to the nuts and bolts of th is thing. Implementation is not the easiest thing in the world on this. The re is a reason you don't see these on the shelves or incorporated into amps and receivers.
So is it advisable to post the text of a Spice file on here ?
On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 8:52:22 AM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wro te:
t application absolutely *does* establish prior art. The invention is docu mented in an application, so at that point no one can claim they invented i t since this provisional application documents it in a public manner.
group. He was full of little nuggets like this.
Respectfully, this is not true for at least three reasons:
One: The prior art always exists, in its own right, even before you file anythin g. A provisional (if later successful as a non-provisional application within on year) simply establishes the date of any advancement in the art (i.e., t he invention).
It doesn't do anything to the prior art.
Two: Provisional patent applications are NEVER published. The Patent Office doe sn't even look at them unless and until a later-filed non-provisional attem pts to claim the earlier filing date of the provisional.
Provisional patent applications are only good for one year, and are conside red abandoned afterwards.
Three: By itself, a provisional patent application does not qualify as prior art u nder 35 USC 102. (Google: Dynamic Drinkware, LLC v. National Graphics, In c., 800 F.3d 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2015) for more on this. Note the key phrase i n the sentence above is "By itself.." There are exceptions.
I am not an attorney, but I do own 4 patents. There's lot of bad intel out there...
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.