[njtosd]

[quote=urbanrealtor]

I am not sure what would be unethical. No sale price is “ultimate” (this property resold for far more years later). It is our job to consult and give our opinion of market value for a given property in a given area at a given time. Perhaps I don’t understand what you are asking.

[/quote]

I was just wondering whether a realtor making a public estimate (in other words, posted on a website or otherwise made available to the public) about what s/he thinks a property would sell for might have the tendency to (a) influence a buyer or seller; or (b) rile a buyer’s or sellers agent. It just seems like it might interfere with an ongoing business transaction. I wasn’t referring to consultation with clients. Now that I think about it, I guess Zillow does provide their “Zestimates” – but I don’t think they’re terribly reliable.
The point I was trying to get at is this – I wonder how close, on average, the best “estimator” could predict the ultimate sale price of a given house.

[njtosd]

[quote=urbanrealtor]

I am not sure what would be unethical. No sale price is “ultimate” (this property resold for far more years later). It is our job to consult and give our opinion of market value for a given property in a given area at a given time. Perhaps I don’t understand what you are asking.

[/quote]

I was just wondering whether a realtor making a public estimate (in other words, posted on a website or otherwise made available to the public) about what s/he thinks a property would sell for might have the tendency to (a) influence a buyer or seller; or (b) rile a buyer’s or sellers agent. It just seems like it might interfere with an ongoing business transaction. I wasn’t referring to consultation with clients. Now that I think about it, I guess Zillow does provide their “Zestimates” – but I don’t think they’re terribly reliable.
The point I was trying to get at is this – I wonder how close, on average, the best “estimator” could predict the ultimate sale price of a given house.

[njtosd]

[quote=BullBull]…. If you just want to get started, then you can file a provisional patent application. It doesn’t have all the formal requirements of a real application, but will last a year (after which you’ll have to abandon it or file a real application). You can write a provisional patent application yourself. The patent office has a how-to write-up. Within a year you should know if your idea has any commercial value. Make sure you do the search for prior art before spending too much time on an application.[/quote]

I wasn’t trying to respond to this comment in my earlier post (BullBull’s comment was posted while I was writing mine). The provisional patent system was put in place to put U.S. filers and foreign filers on equal footing for timing purposes. It was part of GATT.

For a good summary of the pros and cons of provisional applications, take a look at this article “Be Careful with Provisional Patent Applications” http://www.inc.com/resources/startup/articles/20070701/mlechter.html

[njtosd]

[quote=BullBull]…. If you just want to get started, then you can file a provisional patent application. It doesn’t have all the formal requirements of a real application, but will last a year (after which you’ll have to abandon it or file a real application). You can write a provisional patent application yourself. The patent office has a how-to write-up. Within a year you should know if your idea has any commercial value. Make sure you do the search for prior art before spending too much time on an application.[/quote]

I wasn’t trying to respond to this comment in my earlier post (BullBull’s comment was posted while I was writing mine). The provisional patent system was put in place to put U.S. filers and foreign filers on equal footing for timing purposes. It was part of GATT.

For a good summary of the pros and cons of provisional applications, take a look at this article “Be Careful with Provisional Patent Applications” http://www.inc.com/resources/startup/articles/20070701/mlechter.html

[njtosd]

[quote=BullBull]…. If you just want to get started, then you can file a provisional patent application. It doesn’t have all the formal requirements of a real application, but will last a year (after which you’ll have to abandon it or file a real application). You can write a provisional patent application yourself. The patent office has a how-to write-up. Within a year you should know if your idea has any commercial value. Make sure you do the search for prior art before spending too much time on an application.[/quote]

I wasn’t trying to respond to this comment in my earlier post (BullBull’s comment was posted while I was writing mine). The provisional patent system was put in place to put U.S. filers and foreign filers on equal footing for timing purposes. It was part of GATT.

For a good summary of the pros and cons of provisional applications, take a look at this article “Be Careful with Provisional Patent Applications” http://www.inc.com/resources/startup/articles/20070701/mlechter.html

[njtosd]

[quote=BullBull]…. If you just want to get started, then you can file a provisional patent application. It doesn’t have all the formal requirements of a real application, but will last a year (after which you’ll have to abandon it or file a real application). You can write a provisional patent application yourself. The patent office has a how-to write-up. Within a year you should know if your idea has any commercial value. Make sure you do the search for prior art before spending too much time on an application.[/quote]

I wasn’t trying to respond to this comment in my earlier post (BullBull’s comment was posted while I was writing mine). The provisional patent system was put in place to put U.S. filers and foreign filers on equal footing for timing purposes. It was part of GATT.

For a good summary of the pros and cons of provisional applications, take a look at this article “Be Careful with Provisional Patent Applications” http://www.inc.com/resources/startup/articles/20070701/mlechter.html

[njtosd]

[quote=BullBull]…. If you just want to get started, then you can file a provisional patent application. It doesn’t have all the formal requirements of a real application, but will last a year (after which you’ll have to abandon it or file a real application). You can write a provisional patent application yourself. The patent office has a how-to write-up. Within a year you should know if your idea has any commercial value. Make sure you do the search for prior art before spending too much time on an application.[/quote]

I wasn’t trying to respond to this comment in my earlier post (BullBull’s comment was posted while I was writing mine). The provisional patent system was put in place to put U.S. filers and foreign filers on equal footing for timing purposes. It was part of GATT.

For a good summary of the pros and cons of provisional applications, take a look at this article “Be Careful with Provisional Patent Applications” http://www.inc.com/resources/startup/articles/20070701/mlechter.html

[njtosd]

I am a registered patent attorney – although I am not currently working (well, I’m a stay at home mom – people differ on whether that counts as work). Not meaning to give legal advice here, but here are a few things to consider:
As I’m sure you know, the patent process is long and involved, but the very first thing to remember is not to disclose your invention before getting your application on file. Although the U.S. allows you to file your application up to one year after a public disclosure (and the word “public” has a very specific definition) almost all other countries forbid filing on inventions that have been publicly disclosed (and they have a slightly different standard for what is a public disclosure).
And don’t let someone convince you that you can file something thrown together as a “provisional” application that can be cleaned up later in a non-provisional application. If you file a provisional, it should be of the same quality as a standard filing – although you need not include claims until you file the non-provisional.
You might want to get in touch with UCSD Connect (http://www.connect.org/). My husband (also a patent attorney) used to volunteer with Connect and it seems to be a really good organization. I know that they provide free business assistance to companies who want to capitalize on their IP, but I don’t know if they have people who can help with preparing and filing applications.
If you want to pm me I can give you some more info. And I agree that if at all possible, you’re better off manufacturing in the U.S.

If you’re interested in the patent system as a whole, you might also want to take a look at this article that I mentioned in another thread:

Inventing our Way Out of Joblessness (by Judge Paul Michel, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and Henry Northhaft)

The authors argue that returning $750 million (plus an additional $250,000) to the U.S. Patent Office would produce “over the next three years, at least 675,000 and as many as 2.25 million jobs. Assuming a mid-range figure of 1.5 million, the price would be roughly $660 per job — and that would be 525 times more cost effective than the 2.5 million jobs created by the government’s $787 billion stimulus plan.”

The article pointed to the Berkeley Patent Study, which supported the contention that each issued patent is associated with 3 to 10 new jobs.

Congrats for having the gumption to try to create something new. If everyone keeps trying to invest in someone else’s technology, we will eventually end up with a lot of investors and no technology to invest in.

[njtosd]

I am a registered patent attorney – although I am not currently working (well, I’m a stay at home mom – people differ on whether that counts as work). Not meaning to give legal advice here, but here are a few things to consider:
As I’m sure you know, the patent process is long and involved, but the very first thing to remember is not to disclose your invention before getting your application on file. Although the U.S. allows you to file your application up to one year after a public disclosure (and the word “public” has a very specific definition) almost all other countries forbid filing on inventions that have been publicly disclosed (and they have a slightly different standard for what is a public disclosure).
And don’t let someone convince you that you can file something thrown together as a “provisional” application that can be cleaned up later in a non-provisional application. If you file a provisional, it should be of the same quality as a standard filing – although you need not include claims until you file the non-provisional.
You might want to get in touch with UCSD Connect (http://www.connect.org/). My husband (also a patent attorney) used to volunteer with Connect and it seems to be a really good organization. I know that they provide free business assistance to companies who want to capitalize on their IP, but I don’t know if they have people who can help with preparing and filing applications.
If you want to pm me I can give you some more info. And I agree that if at all possible, you’re better off manufacturing in the U.S.

If you’re interested in the patent system as a whole, you might also want to take a look at this article that I mentioned in another thread:

Inventing our Way Out of Joblessness (by Judge Paul Michel, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and Henry Northhaft)

The authors argue that returning $750 million (plus an additional $250,000) to the U.S. Patent Office would produce “over the next three years, at least 675,000 and as many as 2.25 million jobs. Assuming a mid-range figure of 1.5 million, the price would be roughly $660 per job — and that would be 525 times more cost effective than the 2.5 million jobs created by the government’s $787 billion stimulus plan.”

The article pointed to the Berkeley Patent Study, which supported the contention that each issued patent is associated with 3 to 10 new jobs.

Congrats for having the gumption to try to create something new. If everyone keeps trying to invest in someone else’s technology, we will eventually end up with a lot of investors and no technology to invest in.

[njtosd]

I am a registered patent attorney – although I am not currently working (well, I’m a stay at home mom – people differ on whether that counts as work). Not meaning to give legal advice here, but here are a few things to consider:
As I’m sure you know, the patent process is long and involved, but the very first thing to remember is not to disclose your invention before getting your application on file. Although the U.S. allows you to file your application up to one year after a public disclosure (and the word “public” has a very specific definition) almost all other countries forbid filing on inventions that have been publicly disclosed (and they have a slightly different standard for what is a public disclosure).
And don’t let someone convince you that you can file something thrown together as a “provisional” application that can be cleaned up later in a non-provisional application. If you file a provisional, it should be of the same quality as a standard filing – although you need not include claims until you file the non-provisional.
You might want to get in touch with UCSD Connect (http://www.connect.org/). My husband (also a patent attorney) used to volunteer with Connect and it seems to be a really good organization. I know that they provide free business assistance to companies who want to capitalize on their IP, but I don’t know if they have people who can help with preparing and filing applications.
If you want to pm me I can give you some more info. And I agree that if at all possible, you’re better off manufacturing in the U.S.

If you’re interested in the patent system as a whole, you might also want to take a look at this article that I mentioned in another thread:

Inventing our Way Out of Joblessness (by Judge Paul Michel, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and Henry Northhaft)

The authors argue that returning $750 million (plus an additional $250,000) to the U.S. Patent Office would produce “over the next three years, at least 675,000 and as many as 2.25 million jobs. Assuming a mid-range figure of 1.5 million, the price would be roughly $660 per job — and that would be 525 times more cost effective than the 2.5 million jobs created by the government’s $787 billion stimulus plan.”

The article pointed to the Berkeley Patent Study, which supported the contention that each issued patent is associated with 3 to 10 new jobs.

Congrats for having the gumption to try to create something new. If everyone keeps trying to invest in someone else’s technology, we will eventually end up with a lot of investors and no technology to invest in.

[njtosd]

I am a registered patent attorney – although I am not currently working (well, I’m a stay at home mom – people differ on whether that counts as work). Not meaning to give legal advice here, but here are a few things to consider:
As I’m sure you know, the patent process is long and involved, but the very first thing to remember is not to disclose your invention before getting your application on file. Although the U.S. allows you to file your application up to one year after a public disclosure (and the word “public” has a very specific definition) almost all other countries forbid filing on inventions that have been publicly disclosed (and they have a slightly different standard for what is a public disclosure).
And don’t let someone convince you that you can file something thrown together as a “provisional” application that can be cleaned up later in a non-provisional application. If you file a provisional, it should be of the same quality as a standard filing – although you need not include claims until you file the non-provisional.
You might want to get in touch with UCSD Connect (http://www.connect.org/). My husband (also a patent attorney) used to volunteer with Connect and it seems to be a really good organization. I know that they provide free business assistance to companies who want to capitalize on their IP, but I don’t know if they have people who can help with preparing and filing applications.
If you want to pm me I can give you some more info. And I agree that if at all possible, you’re better off manufacturing in the U.S.

If you’re interested in the patent system as a whole, you might also want to take a look at this article that I mentioned in another thread:

Inventing our Way Out of Joblessness (by Judge Paul Michel, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and Henry Northhaft)

The authors argue that returning $750 million (plus an additional $250,000) to the U.S. Patent Office would produce “over the next three years, at least 675,000 and as many as 2.25 million jobs. Assuming a mid-range figure of 1.5 million, the price would be roughly $660 per job — and that would be 525 times more cost effective than the 2.5 million jobs created by the government’s $787 billion stimulus plan.”

The article pointed to the Berkeley Patent Study, which supported the contention that each issued patent is associated with 3 to 10 new jobs.

Congrats for having the gumption to try to create something new. If everyone keeps trying to invest in someone else’s technology, we will eventually end up with a lot of investors and no technology to invest in.

[njtosd]

I am a registered patent attorney – although I am not currently working (well, I’m a stay at home mom – people differ on whether that counts as work). Not meaning to give legal advice here, but here are a few things to consider:
As I’m sure you know, the patent process is long and involved, but the very first thing to remember is not to disclose your invention before getting your application on file. Although the U.S. allows you to file your application up to one year after a public disclosure (and the word “public” has a very specific definition) almost all other countries forbid filing on inventions that have been publicly disclosed (and they have a slightly different standard for what is a public disclosure).
And don’t let someone convince you that you can file something thrown together as a “provisional” application that can be cleaned up later in a non-provisional application. If you file a provisional, it should be of the same quality as a standard filing – although you need not include claims until you file the non-provisional.
You might want to get in touch with UCSD Connect (http://www.connect.org/). My husband (also a patent attorney) used to volunteer with Connect and it seems to be a really good organization. I know that they provide free business assistance to companies who want to capitalize on their IP, but I don’t know if they have people who can help with preparing and filing applications.
If you want to pm me I can give you some more info. And I agree that if at all possible, you’re better off manufacturing in the U.S.

If you’re interested in the patent system as a whole, you might also want to take a look at this article that I mentioned in another thread:

Inventing our Way Out of Joblessness (by Judge Paul Michel, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and Henry Northhaft)

The authors argue that returning $750 million (plus an additional $250,000) to the U.S. Patent Office would produce “over the next three years, at least 675,000 and as many as 2.25 million jobs. Assuming a mid-range figure of 1.5 million, the price would be roughly $660 per job — and that would be 525 times more cost effective than the 2.5 million jobs created by the government’s $787 billion stimulus plan.”

The article pointed to the Berkeley Patent Study, which supported the contention that each issued patent is associated with 3 to 10 new jobs.

Congrats for having the gumption to try to create something new. If everyone keeps trying to invest in someone else’s technology, we will eventually end up with a lot of investors and no technology to invest in.

[njtosd]

[quote=SD Realtor]Kind of helps when you have jobs so that people need to go to those transportation hubs to come visit.

As much as everyone hates to hear it, unless you enhance opportunities for corporations to operate in the USA the more jobs will leave our country.

. . .
[/quote]

What about taking a small fraction ($1 billion) of the amount that has gone out in bail out money and give it back to the U.S. patent office? Congress has had a long habit of diverting funds from PTO coffers, resulting in a huge backlog of cases. Judge Paul Michel (a judge who sits on the the bench for the U.S. Court of Appeals that hears patent cases) wrote a very convincing article in the NYT entitled Inventing our Way Out of Joblessness that reached the following conclusion:

“So our guess is that restoring the patent office to full functionality would create, over the next three years, at least 675,000 and as many as 2.25 million jobs. Assuming a mid-range figure of 1.5 million, the price would be roughly $660 per job — and that would be 525 times more cost effective than the 2.5 million jobs created by the government’s $787 billion stimulus plan.”

Perhaps we wouldn’t have to decide about whether to let the market fall if we could something about creating more jobs. . .

[njtosd]

[quote=SD Realtor]Kind of helps when you have jobs so that people need to go to those transportation hubs to come visit.

As much as everyone hates to hear it, unless you enhance opportunities for corporations to operate in the USA the more jobs will leave our country.

. . .
[/quote]

What about taking a small fraction ($1 billion) of the amount that has gone out in bail out money and give it back to the U.S. patent office? Congress has had a long habit of diverting funds from PTO coffers, resulting in a huge backlog of cases. Judge Paul Michel (a judge who sits on the the bench for the U.S. Court of Appeals that hears patent cases) wrote a very convincing article in the NYT entitled Inventing our Way Out of Joblessness that reached the following conclusion:

“So our guess is that restoring the patent office to full functionality would create, over the next three years, at least 675,000 and as many as 2.25 million jobs. Assuming a mid-range figure of 1.5 million, the price would be roughly $660 per job — and that would be 525 times more cost effective than the 2.5 million jobs created by the government’s $787 billion stimulus plan.”

Perhaps we wouldn’t have to decide about whether to let the market fall if we could something about creating more jobs. . .

[njtosd]

[quote=SD Realtor]Kind of helps when you have jobs so that people need to go to those transportation hubs to come visit.

As much as everyone hates to hear it, unless you enhance opportunities for corporations to operate in the USA the more jobs will leave our country.

. . .
[/quote]

What about taking a small fraction ($1 billion) of the amount that has gone out in bail out money and give it back to the U.S. patent office? Congress has had a long habit of diverting funds from PTO coffers, resulting in a huge backlog of cases. Judge Paul Michel (a judge who sits on the the bench for the U.S. Court of Appeals that hears patent cases) wrote a very convincing article in the NYT entitled Inventing our Way Out of Joblessness that reached the following conclusion:

“So our guess is that restoring the patent office to full functionality would create, over the next three years, at least 675,000 and as many as 2.25 million jobs. Assuming a mid-range figure of 1.5 million, the price would be roughly $660 per job — and that would be 525 times more cost effective than the 2.5 million jobs created by the government’s $787 billion stimulus plan.”

Perhaps we wouldn’t have to decide about whether to let the market fall if we could something about creating more jobs. . .

[Author]

Posts