Re: Trade names, patents

[Thomas Stubbing <thomas.stubbing@heat-win.co.uk>]

Dear Daniel:

Carefreeland@aol.com wrote:

>  Dear Mr. Stubbing,
>        I am in a peculiar spot where my devices of consideration will be
> constantly developed over a great period of time.  Very little cash flow may
> result from early development. I will manage the patent process by all of the
> means necessary to establish proprietary rights as I go on what I really need
> to.
>          Probably I will do the large part of the search process myself at
> great expense in time and effort.  I make less per hour than the patent
> attorney I would hire.  I happen to be in a position to know more than most
> average guys (which is still woefully inadequate) about the patent process
> and my devises.

I was an employee in Germany when I filed my first patent application.

There there is a law on employee inventions which secures the position of the
lone inventor and a tax law which taxes individuals' royalties at half the rate
applied to wages and salaries on the basis that work can be repeated but not
inventions.

I was lucky and those laws help account for the strength of Germany's
technological base!

Over the years I have become adept at drafting my own patent specifications so
like you I save a lot in patent agents' fees.

>  My friends and family have had experience here.  Inventors
> should know they can do this themselves.
>        My string of sometimes political letters is an effort to call
> attention to the plight of an ordinary guy who does not understand the
> complexity of the process.  I also am constantly disappointed in stories I
> hear from local inventors that have had bad experiences with the system.
> Dayton, Ohio, USA is among the most inventive towns in the world.  Shouldn't
> we encourage this?

Yes!

>
>        Large Corporations have clearly tilted the patent process against the
> unknowledgable small guy.  I am disappointed in the fact that with today's
> technology, the patent process cannot be more user friendly, and fair.
>         So inventor beware!
>         One common technique I have heard of is this: A large corporation
> obtains exclusive license on a patent, and then does not develop it until the
> patent has expired.  This prevents the competition from using the devise, as
> well as the inventor from collecting a single royalty check.

When licensing a corporation the inventor must be able to terminate the licence
if that happens and get minimum annual royalties contractually built in.

>
>         What is the defense of a small one devise inventor, that believes he
> is in for a good ride here, only to find he has been kidnapped?  Who really
> benefits from this stupidity?

Inventors, who are not technically stupid, must simply avoid being commercially
stupid themselves!

>
>        My aim is to stimulate open debate both for my own information, and to
> call attention to any fixes which could be prescribed.  You could say I'm
> playing "devils advocate" for the little guy.  All with experience or
> knowledge are welcome to comment.

I hope these further comments will help you.

Regards,

Thomas

>
>
>   Thank you for your input.
>                                     Daniel Dimiduk



-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net
Elsen L. Karstad, elk@wananchi.com www.chardust.com

List-Post: <mailto:stoves@crest.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stoves-help@crest.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:stoves-unsubscribe@crest.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:stoves-subscribe@crest.org>

Sponsor the Stoves List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
-
Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
http://www.bioenergy2002.org
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml

For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm