Hello again.

Thanks for the quick response.

The about this site is that we are set up to provide information about the law, but not take on specific cases. The reasons are, unfortunately, legalistic, but important. We cannot provide confidential attorney-client review on a publicly-accessible online legal information forum. And review of a specific patent falls into the kind of thing its necessary to have one's lawyer.

A good patent lawyer will also have many connections to brokers and industry leaders who may be interested in the patent; he or she can also help revise the processes or inventions involved to help identify ways they can be incorporated into something new that could qualify for a new patent.

If you need any information on how to find a good patent lawyer in your area, please let me know.

I wish you all the best with your venture!

Thanks!

It really depends on how the device is constituted, whether the process is NOT obvious to those learned in the field, etc. Also, it would have to pass muster as truly "novel" to get patent protection.

It is nearly impossible to give much advice on the patentability of a particular thing without a lawyer who specializes in "prosecuting" patents (that's filing applications, usually someone who also has an advanced degree in a relevant technical or scientific field, along with a law degree and license).

As noted before, because this publicly accessible website can't provide confidential attorney-client analyses, protected by attorney-client privilege, it can't substitute for that kind of detailed legal and technological review.

That said, as a matter of legal information (as opposed to advice about a specific possible patent), remember that patent applications mean publication. Anyone can see your work -- and if the patent is not granted, or is effectively challenged in court, then the 'cat's out of the bag.'

Indeed, even if a patent is granted, someone could reverse engineer an alternative but similar thing. And that would put a burden on the inventor(s) of the original to defend it through patent infringement lawsuits etc.

In lieu of patent exposure, many inventions are revealed to potential investors or sales partners with "non-disclosure" agreements that lay out, by contract, a high price for revealing trade secrets. While enforcement would require a lawsuit (or arbitration, if the contract requires it), at least there's a stronger legal basis for protection than with a patent application that is either granted or a court orders rescinded OR an item that can be easily reverse-engineered.

The software portions, if original, can also receive copyright protection -- but only for the expression of ideas, not for the idea itself. Someone else could create software that does the same thing, but uses different code to achieve it.

I hope this information will be helpful, even this is not the right forum to get an assertive evaluation of a particular invention. But I see in your post that you are well-read and I'm sure you wanted the straight scoop here.

Again, I wish you and your partners much success!

Thanks. Unfortunately, the site's managers like to keep things need and easily archivable. That means when there's something that's a new question rather than a follow up on a previous answer, they like to have it in a new question box.

After you either accept or reject this last answer (I hope accept!), If you don't mind reposting the question, putting at the top, "FOR ATTORNEY WAYNE," I'd be glad to answer the new query.

I truly appreciate your allowing us to help!

Warm regards,

I am glad to continue to assist. . With your clarification that this is a reference to the same thread, let me now proceed.

To begin, the technical term is "Business Method Patent" not a business model patent. It may sound like a distinction without much difference, but the little bit does make a difference. Business models are much more broad (e.g. All you can eat, unbundled services, prepaid, postpaid, Or possibly, coop, sole proprietorship, LLC etc).

A business method is more like a patent thats granted on for an industrial or scientific process. So, its probably best to think of it as a "process" and not a way of doing business (a method).

The most famous of these business method patents is Amazon's "one-click" shopping cart system. Thus, Amazon's model for doing business is not patentable (online, shipping fast etc), but the actual process of making it easier to buy with a single click has been allowed in the US (and this year, in Canada) to be granted letters patent.

The Patent Office has put online its most recent guidance for patent examiners reviewing business method patents. (It arises from a key Supreme Court case of recent vintage.) You can see the guidance at this link: http://www.uspto.gov/patents/announce/bilski_guidance.jsp

Unfortunately, this entire area of law is in flux; as you'll see when you read the material in the links above. There is much room for various lower courts to interpret, limit or expand the applicability of business method patents -- or for deep-pocketed competitors to attack with expensive litigation.

So its really important to discuss all the potential for upside and downside risk with an attorney who has confidentially reviewed your plans and helps to draft your patent application(s).

The botXXXXX XXXXXne is that the general statement that a business method patent grant requires "concrete, useful and tangible result(s)" really means that you can't patent something pie in the sky. In the same way, the Patent Office won't register a "perpetual motion" machine -- as there's NO scientific way to set aside the laws of entropy in physics.

Attorney Wayne41030.9956625347