In no sense do they guarantee this. It would be closer to the mark to say they guaranteed the pat holder would lose money.
Right, that's the purpose from one view. I guess we should consider all views then. Whats the purpose from the patent lawyer's view? :)
Almost all inventions should not be patented. Few are worth it.
That's not a reason to patent tho. You can put your ideas on the web free. A patent is purely a business move.
Regards, NT
. . .
Let's just say at least 99% never make any money for the patent holder.
I'm guessing 90% of patents result purely from vanity -- some idiot wants his name in the Official Gazette --, another 9% from a cold [mis] calculated attempt to make money.
But those few drive the entire economy.
Bret Cahill
"The indescribable joy of creation."
-- John Steinbeck
"Slow dime over the fast nickel."
Copyright does not apply. A patent might, but the idea can't be obvious.
You are welcome.
Agreement at last... except for the minor nit that lots of the economy is driven by things that aren't patented, or never were.
Regards, NT
Is that similar to those (now) Agilent products that were "HP source"
Since your circuit design is simple you can write up and apply for the patent yourself. Its a very useful learning lesson and you don't have to spend a fortune. All a patent does is perhaps provide proof that you came up with the idea first. It has defensive protection so that someone else will find it hard to say you copied his invention and ask for damages. Beyond that its not worth suing another party. If you don't sue then it doesn't provide protection against copycats.
Further, its only a circuit. A good engineer can always come up with an equivalent circuit to achieve the same functionality. As everyone else said go in, make it, sell it. The moment someone else enters the same niche, and this is the only product you have, take your money and get out.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required