Has anyone here ever teamed up to work on an invention idea with another forum member?

If not someone here, has anyone ever developed a "long distance relationship" with someone to work on a for profit project? How did it work out in terms of completing the project, etc?

How did you go about protecting yourself in terms of insuring that your partner didn't just take your idea and work and run?

 

How did you go about protecting yourself in terms of insuring that your partner didn't just take your idea and work and run?

My experience was with an established company. After the usual NDA (non disclosure agreement), I passed on the information necessary for them to not only make, but improve on my stuff.

A large third grade class with students all diagnosed with ADD could have done better. Their "improvement" failed to function in any useful manner, and a rank copy of my instrument failed to work in many interesting ways. I believe I gave up the analysis of failures after 5 pages.

However, one interestingly critical part of the instrument somehow did not get returned, and they may be trying to get in bed with my competition in Holland.

This is somewhat irritating, as the man in Holland is utterly incompetent and has published numerous papers stating that my instruments can't work. So, between his lack of useful knowledge and the corporation's utter incompetence on their own part, I really doubt if anything will come of what amounts to industrial spying.

Nevertheless, I really dislike both of those clowns. The one will have to eat 20 years of utterly wrong analysis because people with my stuff are starting to publish pretty heavily. The results are good enough that even the very partisan European journals are going to publish results using my stuff.

 

Wow, I aspire to have your predicaments. What kind of instruments are they, just out of curiousity?

Do you think your experience was the exception or the norm?

 

I will volunteer any information in public. Others can learn from it.

If it comes to money, I am not allowed to participate, or submit complete advanced work on projects free or not.

 

What kind of instruments are they, just out of curiousity?

Gotta be just a bit vague, as the patenting process is still ongoing. It's a sensitive and adaptable biological potential amplifier. Very handy if you work with some kinds of insects.

 

Gotta be just a bit vague, as the patenting process is still ongoing. It's a sensitive and adaptable biological potential amplifier. Very handy if you work with some kinds of insects.

Wow. I couldn't even begin to imagine what that even means.

 

a non disclosure,a letter of intent, and possibly a service contract.

the letter of intent should define ownership, or at least a formula for calculating ownership. It should also define a process for mediating your future relationship. If you retain ownership, then a service contract might be helpful in defining services rendered and renumeration.

It will all depend on the 'ethical' bases that your 'partner' functions on. Written documents are often worthless if your conspiring with someone from overseas, or even across an international boundary.

 

Roll a dice. You'll get about the same odds and protection for whether you get ripped off or not, and it's much quicker and cheaper than all that paperwork.

 

If you're working with USDA, they just love NDA's and patents. No way around it.

 

The bottom line is, if you have a good idea, and you have a working prototype, draw up your plans and copyright them. Next, get a patent lawyer or contact the U.S. Patent Office and patent your prototype. If anyone else gets your plans and tries to re-patent them, they could only patent them as an "improvement on an existing idea" You have to protect yourself. If you give your plans away, publish them on the Internet or make them accessible to the general public, you could lose out big if someone else patents your idea because you made your plans available to the general public without protection.

 

Someone cannot patent an idea that is already available in the public domain.

They can try, but just showing prior art will bust their patent.

What is wrong with open source?

 

Someone cannot patent an idea that is already available in the public domain.

They can try, but just showing prior art will bust their patent.

What is wrong with open source?

In medicine, the incentive to develop a new drug would be lost. To complete clinical trials is up to $1 billion (or more). The chemistry to copy new drugs is trivial.

John

 

Ahh.. Das True..

Other than genetics and medicine..

 

It's funny you mention genetics. It used to be that a "composition of nature" could not be patented. Thus, the structure of compounds like firefly luciferin (Johns Hopkins) could not be patented, but the way to make it could be. Genetics changed that game. I am still uncomfortable with patents on the human genome. I just don't want to be arrested for reproducing it unintentionally. The other penalties are already great enough.

John

 

It's funny you mention genetics. It used to be that a "composition of nature" could not be patented. Thus, the structure of compounds like firefly luciferin (Johns Hopkins) could not be patented, but the way to make it could be. Genetics changed that game. I am still uncomfortable with patents on the human genome. I just don't want to be arrested for reproducing it unintentionally. The other penalties are already great enough.

John

Thats right... And ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Soon enough, Hitler 2.0 will be jailing people for not carrying the REQUIRED blond hair and blue eye genes.

"I must have left them in my other jeans officer!"

 

The bottom line is, if you have a good idea, and you have a working prototype, draw up your plans and copyright them. Next, get a patent lawyer or contact the U.S. Patent Office and patent your prototype. If anyone else gets your plans and tries to re-patent them, they could only patent them as an "improvement on an existing idea" You have to protect yourself. If you give your plans away, publish them on the Internet or make them accessible to the general public, you could lose out big if someone else patents your idea because you made your plans available to the general public without protection.

Not a chance. It costs at least $10k to get a patent, and, according to Dave Jones on his video, up to $1 million to defend it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7BL1O0xCcY

 

Drugs have quite a protection plan on patent. All drugs invented get 5 years protection against generic manufacturers and is sold by name brand only. This is why a real bottle of Valuim is $600 and a bottle of diazapam is $15. Also they don't test these drugs near as much as they would like you to beleive. Many times drugs are rushed and lobbied onto the market only to find out in real tests when prescribed the effects are really bad. Thats why those lawyers make so much money saying "If you've taken this drug and died call now for a class action law suit. Plus if drugs were properly tested they wouldn't be pulled off the market so much. Back in the day when testing was really done we didn't have near the recalls we have now. Anyways once your drug invention is past its 5 year protection then its able to be made by anyone, but the mnf, has the right reapply if they can find a new use for their drug and get another 5 years. Prozac just tried that. They had the patent for bipolar or depession then it ran out. Then they quickly tried to market and invent a PMS disorder called PMD or something like that saying it was a new use for prozac and they should get another 5 years protection. It didn't work though. Somehow my migrane medicine has managed to stay patented for over 9 years with no generics selling for 9 tablets for $295. Not sure who they paid off but it worked. Sadly its like $25 in Europe.

 

Drug companies also expel fillers and call it a "new" drug.

Dont quote me on this but I think it was Lipitor. The original had 2 or 3 types of filler material. After the generic protection ran out, they re-released the same pill with one less IN-ACTIVE ingredient. This was considered a reformulation and they get a "reset". The old formulation is no longer produced.

Also, I generic drugs can be off by 5% on their listed value.

A 100mg Morphine pill can have as little as 95mg or as much as 105mg of morphine in each pill.

As a bartender years ago, I had a regular who fell off a scaffold in a Giant food store while changing lightbulbs for a lighting company.

Broke his back..sued..lifetime care..

So he would pop his Percocets routinely.

He went on about this generic version that "packed more of a punch" then the brand name.

He would pull his script from a pharmacy and go to another to find the ones who had the particular generic.

It could be a head-game.. but he seemed convinced. (So did the people that bought pills from him in the bathroom)

It is amazing how drunk people think they are being quiet.

 

Drugs have quite a protection plan on patent. All drugs invented get 5 years protection against generic manufacturers and is sold by name brand only. This is why a real bottle of Valuim is $600 and a bottle of diazapam is $15.

Where is that? In the US, #90, Valium 10 mg is $309; generic is $289.

Also they don't test these drugs near as much as they would like you to beleive. Many times drugs are rushed and lobbied onto the market only to find out in real tests when prescribed the effects are really bad. Thats why those lawyers make so much money saying "If you've taken this drug and died call now for a class action law suit. Plus if drugs were properly tested they wouldn't be pulled off the market so much.

Please tell us what YOUR experience is in new drug testing. Can you cite any study or authority validating your assertion? If anything, drug validation is much more rigorous today than it was 20 or 30 years ago.

Back in the day when testing was really done we didn't have near the recalls we have now.

That's pure imagination. It's wrong. Please give some data to support your assertions.

Anyways once your drug invention is past its 5 year protection then its able to be made by anyone, but the mnf, has the right reapply if they can find a new use for their drug and get another 5 years. Prozac just tried that. They had the patent for bipolar or depession then it ran out. Then they quickly tried to market and invent a PMS disorder called PMD or something like that saying it was a new use for prozac and they should get another 5 years protection. It didn't work though. Somehow my migrane medicine has managed to stay patented for over 9 years with no generics selling for 9 tablets for $295. Not sure who they paid off but it worked. Sadly its like $25 in Europe.

Maybe you need more.

John