how to take PATENT (U.S's institutes) ??

[blue89]

hi dear scientists ;

 

I would take patent(s) from this country's institute(s) if(/how) it is possible (/is).

 

I request from the scientists whoes had (already) taken patent or who have been trying this to tell us steps ,requirements (not general requitrements implied ,general requirements have already been explained on their websites ) I can simply mean ; people who live the real events know more clearly everything related incident that he/she lived. therefore ,although the basic requirements have alredy been explained ,there would be probably existed else and different/(containinin some particular) information relevant to those researchers e-mails' contacting results.)

 

please help (us) new scientists how to take PATENT.

 

best regards

Edited July 7, 2016 by blue89

[Strange]

Generally it is best to file a patent in you own country first. You then have 12 months to file the same patent in other countries.

 

Unless you have a lot of experience writing patent applications, it is usually a good idea to pay a patent agent to help you write the patent. There are some very specific rules about the language and format. Getting this wrong can mean your patent is invalid or does not give you the protection you need.

 

You may also need advice on what things can be patented.

[blue89]

Generally it is best to file a patent in you own country first. You then have 12 months to file the same patent in other countries.

 

Unless you have a lot of experience writing patent applications, it is usually a good idea to pay a patent agent to help you write the patent. There are some very specific rules about the language and format. Getting this wrong can mean your patent is invalid or does not give you the protection you need.

 

You may also need advice on what things can be patented.

 

dear Strange ;

 

I recommend that you check the thread('s content) one more time please. I actually do not need information that had already been explained related websites.however it would be good to give emphasis the reason of my aim via trying to take patent from U.S. that's why I actually do not wish to remain somewhere which it would be quite difficult to explain only opinions ,I would feel deeply free to show my creative aspect of personality effectively.

 

according to my existing knowledge,i think this would be the best to prefer being at U.S.A ,otherwise I already think that the most effective and (akmost) unique parameter would be relevant ECONOMY to do/create something great in science.this means it will not be so effective in which university for learning/studying/WORKING at real. and I would notify you that this point had been released/sent to harvard/gsas at the content of my first project.and our communication is still being continued with harvard.(this university does not already care/depend the something ordinary,I am sure they are looking for something extraordinary! ..)

 

all in all I do not wish to offer my studies to turkish patent institutes now. and exactly need someones who have had experience on this subject.note please ; if you experienced at least anytime ,I predict repeatedly that it would be worthwhile Sharing your knowledge with us.

 

thanks for your care.

regards.

Edited July 7, 2016 by blue89

[Strange]

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are asking.

 

You do not have to apply for a patent in Turkey first but it does make the process simpler. You can apply directly to the US patent office. You will need to use someone fluent in English with experience of writing patents.

 

If you don't want general information, can you ask a more specific question?

I should add that I am not in the US and all my experience of filing patents has been from outside the USA. Are you considering moving to the USA to make it easier to get a patent?

[Sensei]

In the basic manual PDF of my country patent office (Google translate):

 

"The principle is that the [country] legal person or [country] citizens having

a resident on [country] territory can make patent applications abroad after prior notification to the Patent Office

or through the Office (the notifications under international and European)."

 

If it's the same in your country, you cannot skip Turkish patent office, and go directly to U.S. patent office.

Anyway why would you like to go such route? Take European or Worldwide patent instead of just U.S. only..

Worldwide cost is ~ 3100 euros for a start in the first 30 days (part in local currency, part in CHF, part in euros, I joined them together)..

Better you be millionaire already... Later will be further payments, if patent will be not rejected..

 

ps. What patent has to do with "creating something great in science"... ? You cannot patent science discoveries..

You could only patent novel usage for already known science discovery.

 

ps2. PCT – The International Patent System

http://www.wipo.int/pct/en/

Edited July 7, 2016 by Sensei

[Strange]

Just to be clear, there isn't a worldwide or European patent, but there are worldwide and European application processes (WIPO and EPC).

 

If you file a WIPO or EPC application you must, at some point, file national applications in the USA and any other countries where you want protection. It is just a convenient way of getting to that stage.

 

(I'm sure you know this, Sensei, but it confuses many people.)

 

Edit: and, as Sensei says, if you go down this route you must file locally first. But then that is always best. I don't think there are specific rules against it, but the US patent office always looks rather suspiciously at applications from abroad that haven't been filed locally first.

 

Also, you need to consider which are the most important markets for your invention. A patent protects against unlicensed manufacture, sale and use of your invention. So you may want protection in countries where it will be sold and used, as well as countries where it might be manufactured.

 

So it might be important to file the patent in China, where a lot of manufacturing is done. (But the Chinese are notoriously lax about enforcing IP law.)

Edited July 7, 2016 by Strange

[blue89]

ok.

really I also do not know what would be more specific. this was only prediction. but I realised that some bussiness assiciations and academics reporting some varying clues and most of them are being more effective after application.

these all qualifications are known already. (it means these are general..)because all these are written in their website and yes ,turkish patent institute requires the same or approximately similar specifications.I am not demanding really to remain at turkey. simply all problems are politics.

then I thought that it would be better taking patent from U.S. and if I had any intelligiable option ,I would immeadiaytely leave there

ok. I see strange is far from there and has some information about china , yes this would be good writing so other related subjects.

 

I remember I have written a letter to U.S ' s patent institute,but it has not been responded for three days.

another query: is it unique association which exists to give patent at u.s.a.? (in turkey it is unique I know)

Edited July 8, 2016 by blue89

[Strange]

 

is it unique association which exists to give patent at u.s.a.?

 

Yes, patents are issued by governments. In the case if the USA they are managed through the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).

 

I think you are very unlikely to get a response to a casual enquiry. They are very busy - it is hard enough to get a response to a formal application! If they do respond, it could take months.

[blue89]

 

Yes, patents are issued by governments. In the case if the USA they are managed through the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).

 

I think you are very unlikely to get a response to a casual enquiry. They are very busy - it is hard enough to get a response to a formal application! If they do respond, it could take months.

 

really I do not agree this idea. because when I thought/talked about contacting with harvard ,everyone said to me the same opinion. but this were not true.

I have taken 3-4 letter totally from that schoold. the last one was 2 week ago. and it was telling me that office was not evaluating projects,too.and they reccommended me to contact based so particular considerations with other convenient office in the list they written in the content of that last e-mail,via choosing one of them. (the first one was harvard GSE , this was incorrectness of me , but GSE already reccommended me to contact with gsas , and gsas's offer was/is above.)

 

but in relevancy of your comment ,yes probably being unique would/should be true.

 

but I wonder whether it would be too difficult using only this way,I would remind that all projects will/might not be scientific (is it compulsory?).

 

however , I have sent my project's abstract to ecancermedicalscience journall's editor due to her request. but when she asked me that she would learn if I had any else question, I had asked her whether it would be possible to publish our scientific projects at the journals to protect them. then she replied ; some journals might have some protocols for this.but also she added that journals were not publishing project outlines.

 

here is quite important problem : if at each country's patent institutes are unique and normally this makes it difficult improvement of science.

how will we be able to do it.

it is not logical.

there should have been other useful ways

Edited July 8, 2016 by blue89

[ajb]

here is quite important problem : if at each countries patent institutes are unique and naturally this makes it difficult improvement of science.

You don't patent science - you patent engineering of science: so commercial products and similar.

[Strange]

 

but I wonder isn't too difficult to evaluate all projects , I would remind that all projects will/might not be scientific (is it compulsory?).

 

What sort of projects are you talking about? Are we still talking about patents? Most patents are not specifically scientific. They are more likely to be technology based.

 

I can't really think of something purely scientific that could be patented. Theories and discoveries cannot be patented. Only the application of them can be patented. Patents were originally intended to protect "devices" or things that could be manufactured. Some countries later extended this to software. But in many jurisdictions software is not patentable (by itself).

[blue89]

You don't patent science - you patent engineering of science: so commercial products and similar.

 

really although mathematics' content is own approxiametly over %90 theoritic. I would and I give high possibility to create its applications.

forgive for this expressions but ,I do not enjoy only theoritic studies. because I believe this will not provide us enough efficacies.

 

follow please ,I would respond to strange. his comment seems important.

 

What sort of projects are you talking about? Are we still talking about patents? Most patents are not specifically scientific. They are more likely to be technology based.

 

I can't really think of something purely scientific that could be patented. Theories and discoveries cannot be patented. Only the application of them can be patented. Patents were originally intended to protect "devices" or things that could be manufactured. Some countries later extended this to software. But in many jurisdictions software is not patentable (by itself).

 

think please ,here is a project ,and it's features are below.

 

-->> it requires over at least two disciplines for implemention

-->> it requires obeservation(s)/experimen(s)

-->> it has been started with only hyphothesis , but can not be reached to any results without experiment(s)/observation(s).

 

however , yes all comments are intelligiable and also I were pointing out to some of them. but it is clear we can create technologies by improving science.

 

then

 

it is also clear mathematical theories would be useless by assessment in only mathematical departments and/ot experts.(I believe collaboration is required,this comment is for ajb)

note: it would be good to express that I think my studies would be newest. I think it should be true ,I could not hear any sample like them.

Edited July 8, 2016 by blue89

[ajb]

Is this just a theoretical question you have asked about patents, or do you actually have a design of an invention that could become a commercial product?

 

I do not see any connection with your earlier questions on a project to publish as part of your application to Harvard (if I recall correctly).

[Strange]

think please ,here is a project ,and it's features are below.

 

-->> it requires over at least two disciplines for implemention

-->> it requires obesrvation(s)/experimen(s)

-->> it has been started with only hyphothesis , but can not be reached to any results without experiment(s)/observation(s).

 

There is nothing patentable there.

 

If you develop some new machine or device as a result of this process then that device can be patented. Note that getting a patent means that you will have to publish full detail about how it works.

 

One of the difficult things is writing the patent so that someone cannot just change one small bit of the device and then claim it is different from your patent.

[blue89]

do you actually have a design of an invention that could become a commercial product?

 

 

yes of course ,(why not)but unfortunately this own depends on the results of experiments.

experiments/observations are required. compulsory.

Edited July 8, 2016 by blue89

[ajb]

yes of course ,but unfortunately this own depends on the results of experiments.

experiments/observations are required. compulsory.

You have not demonstrated that it works ... I am not sure what the rules are exactly here. However, the patent officers must have good reason to think that the device will work as claimed.

 

You should also be aware, that patents are expensive; the patent offices do not enforce the law - you have to do that and pay; the advice is to use a specialist attorney; other options maybe better for you such as a confidentiality agreements (to keep trade secrets) and trade marks.

[blue89]

You have not demonstrated that it works ... I am not sure what the rules are exactly here. However, the patent officers must have good reason to think that the device will work as claimed.

 

You should also be aware, that patents are expensive; the patent offices do not enforce the law - you have to do that and pay; the advice is to use a specialist attorney; other options maybe better for you such as a confidentiality agreements (to keep trade secrets) and trade marks.

 

dear ajb. really sometimes commonly I think your expressions seem symphatic.

but don't you see/realise that somethings are making improvement difficult due to meaningless reasons?

 

think please ,thomas edison had not done only one experiment for his special invention.

then ,I am sure to create something great ,experiments/observations would be required.

Edited July 8, 2016 by blue89

[Strange]

You have not demonstrated that it works ... I am not sure what the rules are exactly here. However, the patent officers must have good reason to think that the device will work as claimed.

 

Strictly speaking you are supposed to have a working product. I think this would only matter if someone challenged the patent and the court asked you to demonstrate it working. I don't think patent examiners ever ask for a demonstration.

 

Although if you tried to patent a time machine, they might do ...

 

(Also worth noting that the USPTO will automatically reject anything that looks like a perpetual motion or free energy machine.)

think please ,thomas eddison had not done only one experiment for his special invention.

 

If you are thinking of his thousands of experiments to find the best light bulb filament as an example then you could file a patent for the concept before completing all of that research. As long as you have proved that the basic technology works.

 

You could then file another patent for the best version(s) of the technology when the research is completed. Manufacturers are constantly filing new patents for improvements to their products.

[ajb]

dear ajb. really sometimes commonly I think your expressions seem symphatic.

but don't you see/realise that somethings are making improvement difficult due to meaningless reasons?

 

think please ,thomas edison had not done only one experiment for his special invention.

then ,I am sure to create something great ,experiments/observations would be required.

I don't understand your point... either you have some working invention that you would like a patent for, or you don't.

 

If you don't then there is nothing to patent.

[blue89]

I don't understand your point... either you have some working invention that you would like a patent for, or you don't.

 

If you don't then there is nothing to patent.

 

:) follow please.

[ajb]

As long as you have proved that the basic technology works.

This is exactly the point.

[blue89]

 

... demonstration.

 

Although if you tried to patent a time machine, they might do ...

 

(Also worth noting that the USPTO will automatically reject anything that looks like a perpetual motion or free energy machine.)

 

If you are thinking of his thousands of experiments to find the best light bulb filament as an example then you could file a patent for the concept before completing all of that research. As long as you have proved that the basic technology works.

 

You could then file another patent for the best version(s) of the technology when the research is completed. Manufacturers are constantly filing new patents for improvements to their products.

 

 

I am sure everything is coming on together (interdisciplinary) each with them.(collaboration is required! *** interdisciplinary***)

them ,I remember that patent institute implied that demonstration was required. but this term was used more relevant to "definition/description. then when I called to turkish patent instituıte on telephone ,they said me that they would assess all qualifications below.

 

-->> whether it was unique or not

-->> whether it was original or not

-->> there must not be so similar other sample. it should belong to author/inventor.

 

these are already known. then according to mines ;

,

-->> it contains generally allegements. there is no proof that the allegement is true or not. to be able to talk about this section ,the observation(s)/experiment(s) are required.

 

then , because of being interdisciplinary ,of course it may provide us commercial products. why not . it is interdisciplinary.

 

this is rudiment literature.I hoped / expected to take supports via using my such studies. then here is an contradiction (in my opinion)

 

you say/imply ,if there is almost the tiny difference between the two prototype of projects , it would be required to take a new one (patent).

In this case I would remind that everyone says (and also you say) ,that taking patent is not easy , and only one of them may require high expenses (!).

[Strange]

 

:-) follow please.

 

It is almost impossible to follow your posts.

 

Is your project to develop some hardware product that can be manufactured and therefore needs patenting?

[blue89]

 

1)It is almost impossible to follow your posts.

 

2)Is your project to develop some hardware product that can be manufactured and therefore needs patenting?

 

1) may I ask what is your nationality & how old are you, and also in which level now your studies are being spread over? (BSc ,MSc , PhD)

 

2) of course , but I would give emphasis that the project is interdisciplinary.

Edited July 8, 2016 by blue89

[Strange]

 

1) may I ask what is your nationality & how old are you, and also in which level now your studies are being spread over? (BSc ,MSc , PhD)

 

Not really. I am old enough to be your father (or maybe grandfather!) and have almost no formal qualifications beyond a couple of college-level diplomas.

 

 

2) of course , but I would give emphasis that the project is interdisciplinary.

 

Most projects are. That doesn't seem relevant to patentability. Although it suggests you will need a team with all the right skills to develop the product.