Why Don't They ...

[Donald Darden]

Ever ask yourself "Why don't they ..." or "Why doesn't somebody ..."?  I have, many times, and it is usually when I reach a certain level of frustration.

Well, this time I decided to try and do something about it myself.  So I put together a document that describes a concept that I came up with, which just happens to address a gapped area in the PC Peripheral scheme of things, and I've been trying to contact companies that might be interested in my ideas and run it by them.

I've contacted three companies thus far, the first two based on products that they have their names on, and one after a search on the internet.  I just sent them each an email, asking it be forwarded to the Head of Research and Development.  I heard back from two of them, and though the first company would not extend a Nondisclosure Agreement without some details first (hey guys, that is what the dang thing is for, you know), the second entered into a MDA (mutual nondisclosure agreement) without hesitation and considered my ideas, which they found interesting, but then decided that was not in line with their interests.  I've yet to hear from the third company yet.

I don't figure I am going to get rich off this idea, but it fits neatly into the scheme of things, and apparently nobody else has come up with it yet, or acted on it yet.  So I am going to keep plugging along.  In my case, it is applying existing technology in a new and useful way, so once the concept is explained, efforts to implement it would not be incredibly difficult.  Thus, I can't talk about it until I have assurances that my ideas will be treated in confidence.

Now the first company had a reason for refusing to enter into the agreement, which is that I might present an idea that they are already considering.  It would create a situation where they would have to prove that they had the idea first.  So their legal department advised them not to enter into an agreement unless the VP of R&D knew enough about the concept to know if I was treading in an area that they were already exploring.  This is the position that most established companies will likely take.  Which really means that you can't really talk to them - either you effectively give away your idea up front without an agreement, or you refuse to talk to them until you get an agreement, which you don't get because legal got involved.

The second company was smaller than I originally thought.  Instead of hearing from R&D, I heard back from the VP of Production.  That suggests that they outsource their R&D or depend on third party development.  Still, I went ahead and submitted my ideas to them, and these ended up in the hands of a Manager of Production.  I proceeded to sent them some follow up documents to amplify certain details, and after a period of time, they just said that they were not interested.  The problem was, at least in part, that it would take some circuit engineering talent to pull my ideas together, and if they did not have an engineering staff, it was not a good fit.

But part of the problem was on my part as well.  I was still stroking the whole idea and got sort of carried away.  It got a little bit too elaborate, and since I have to avoid revealing it to the wrong ears, I've lacked the means to really bounce it off the walls and make sure it sounds right.  Since I started, I've gone back and done some research on the web to see where I might have gone off the mark, and information there has helped me refine my idea further.

What's interesting is that things are so different today from what they were before.  In the past, I would have had to go to the reference section at the public library and look through listings of companies and check out what they did, then send them a letter or fax and hope to get a reply.  Further research would have also required looking for books or articles in the public library as well, then checking them out for a time, or making copies of them for perhaps 15 cents a sheet.  Research would have been limited to the few hours that I could afford to spend at the library, and to whatever material I could bring away.  Now I just browse for the stuff.  That's what you call a paradigm shift,
which essentially, means a change in the way we think about or see things.

Paradigm shifts are all around us, or at least the footings for bringing about such changes are there in increasing numbers.  One of the big ones is what is the world going to be like when new technology blossoms, as opposed to the increased uncertainty concerning things we've taken for granted for so long which are now reportedly at risk.

What I think gives this particular post some value is that my informal approach, of just looking for a point of contact and sending off an email on the blind, actually gets results.  You tweak their interest, and your email is the bases for a quick and easy response.  Two out of three responses isn't bad, and I may yet hear from the third.  And with the right search query, you can find references to companies that are in the business that interests you or relates to your areas of interest.

Now anybody know any companies that deal with circuit design and development of PC peripherals that might be interested in hearing from an outsider about a new type of peripheral device?  Just let me know.

[Donald Darden]

One of the problems with coming up with a new idea is whether you are really the first to have it or not.  First of all, new ideas rarely come to you out of the dark, they are an attempt by our minds to cope with problems through reason, intuition, or by inference.  Intuition is merely a leap to a conclusion without benefit of a carefully reasoned platform, and inference is the belief that the problem is solvable due to its similarity to something else, or its apparent linear nature.  There are many times when invention has been challenged on the grounds of whether it is just an improvement, or obvious and inevitable, and sometimes two or more parties come up with the same idea at about the same time due to the influence of general advances in the state of the art or technology.

I'm no expert in patent law, or the nature of discovery, invention, copyrights, or any of that.  And the law does change, and you have to distinguish between the laws of one country or international law as well.  Here in the U.S., we have an entire court system that deals with patent and copyright law that is separate from the civil and criminal justice system.

But I was asked today by a friend what I could tell him about the ability of his daughter to copyright a photograph that she took, that someone else wants to use for T-shirts and such.  Now actually, copyright is much simpler to apply than anything else. Anything new that you design, create, or write can be constured as not only copyrightable, but copyrighted as soon as it is rendered to some medium.  Affixing a copyright notice ensures that you give some evidence of when and by whom the rendering is copyrighted, as well as the extent of your claims for that rendering.  But here is something else interesting about copyrights, is that the copyright is not just for that rendering, but conceiveably for the content as well.  If it is a book, just retyping the content does not remove the copyright attached - a mistake a previous employer nearly made until I caught it.  At the same time, photographing or painting a copy of a painting is not considered a copyright voilation, but it would be considered fraud if you tried to pass your painting off as the original work of art.

Like many things in our complex society, patent and copyright law is largely defined by case law.  That is, decisions made at trial are often used to justify later decisions based on president.  This is because general laws and rules have to come under close inspection when applied to specific cases, and hopefully good judgement prevails.  Sometimes it doesn't, so you end up with case law being used against case law in and effort to determines where one prevails over the other.

But back to my friend's problem, he wanted to know what steps he could take to legalize his daughter's claim to her copyright, in case her picture got picked up and misused by someone else.  I told him that I had once read that here, the person wanting to register a copyright could send a copy to the Library of Congress.  As I understand it, they would then register it and give you a reference number that you can use to substantiate your claim later.  But I had also read of another trick, which is to mail copies to yourself or to others that you trust, and as long as the mailed object remains sealed, with the contents intact, the postmark applied by the post office would serve to prove when it was mailed.  You only need to open it in front of witnesses when it proves necessary to substantiate your claim as the originator and when you first attempted to record this fact.

So if you have any nifty ideas that you want to try and market, you might want to attempt to ensure that you render it and take some steps to copyright it before you go too far.  You might need to prove that it was your idea in the first place.

I secured five patents many years ago, an expensive process that never got me a dime in return.  When you secure a patent, news of it and the details involve get published, which did get me one inquiry from a manufacturing company.  Another idea showed up in a different form with a major retailer about a year later, but I had since learned how expensive and difficult it is to engage in a patent war, so I did nothing about it.  Patent law seemed much weaker than copyright law, and I also found considerable confusion about what the status was, especially in the area of mechanical devices.  Essentially, the Patent Office was letting new patent claims stand and issuing new patents based on a very limited examination of existing patents, and forcing the matter into the courts for resolution when the patents were challenged later.  And it gave a big edge to anyone with deep pockets that could afford the long court fights, and meanwhile products could be produced and sold until the court reached a decision.  It was a very one-sided arrangement in my opinion.  Several efforts to reform the patent system have since taken place, and I believe much of the information is now resident on computers, but I don't know if matters have improved much since my experience.

[Kent Sarikaya]

Donald good luck with your project.

When you see how costly it is to get a patent, it gets very discouraging. And of course this day and age, the cost of trials really does give a big advantage to those with deep pockets, as in the case of you not being able to challenge that company.

What gets me is when someone is cleared of some charge but then are hit with a massive legal fee for defending themselves. They get punished financially for something they were innocent of, that is very strange if you ask me. I always think that the side bringing the charge, if the other party is found not guilty or liable, then the one bringing the case should pay all costs. This would diminish the amount of frivolous law suits.

I always thoughts patents should be free and if it generates income, then the government could get the fees for it. This could be a percentage like 1% or so that something that generates lots of income, brings more into the office than something that does less. Hopefully this would cover the costs of patents that don't ever become money making products.

Anyways good luck with things!