Comments on: LegalZoom Patent Review Service Ends http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2008/09/10/legalzoom-patent-review-service-ends/id=198/ Patents, Software Patents, Patent Applications & Patent Law Thu, 09 Feb 2012 01:33:50 +0000 hourly 1 By: Carlos Guerra http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2008/09/10/legalzoom-patent-review-service-ends/id=198/#comment-17943 Carlos Guerra Tue, 28 Dec 2010 00:17:16 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=198#comment-17943 I have spoken with a patent attorney in the past for an invention of mine that I was looking to get patented. After finding out that my idea was patentable, I was told that the typical patent can cost 15 to 20 thousand dollars in attorney fees. Not having that kind of money is the reason I believed that a company like "Legal Zoom" might offer a lower cost for filing my idea. If Legal Zoom isn't the way to go due to these new laws, what can I do to accomplish the patent process? Are there less expensive ways available that are safe? Of course I do not want to be scammed so that Is why I am doing my due diligence regarding companies like Legal Zoom. I have spoken with a patent attorney in the past for an invention of mine that I was looking to get patented. After finding out that my idea was patentable, I was told that the typical patent can cost 15 to 20 thousand dollars in attorney fees. Not having that kind of money is the reason I believed that a company like “Legal Zoom” might offer a lower cost for filing my idea. If Legal Zoom isn’t the way to go due to these new laws, what can I do to accomplish the patent process? Are there less expensive ways available that are safe? Of course I do not want to be scammed so that Is why I am doing my due diligence regarding companies like Legal Zoom.

]]> By: markmalek http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2008/09/10/legalzoom-patent-review-service-ends/id=198/#comment-121 markmalek Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:42:20 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=198#comment-121 Thanks Gene - I figured that attorneys would be in the clear in this situation, but it just points out that the PTO fails to look at many scenarios when they pass down their rules and interpretations of those rules. I think many patent attorneys will agree that this is not the first time that certain rules have not been thought all the way through. As you said, the positive note is that the invention scams have taken a hit. Thanks Gene – I figured that attorneys would be in the clear in this situation, but it just points out that the PTO fails to look at many scenarios when they pass down their rules and interpretations of those rules. I think many patent attorneys will agree that this is not the first time that certain rules have not been thought all the way through. As you said, the positive note is that the invention scams have taken a hit.

]]> By: Gene Quinn http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2008/09/10/legalzoom-patent-review-service-ends/id=198/#comment-115 Gene Quinn Fri, 12 Sep 2008 21:18:28 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=198#comment-115 Mark- I can't imagine in this scenario that the attorney has violated the new rules. As far as I can tell the new rules do not actually require the attorney to file the application on behalf of an inventor they give assistance to, but that is the way OED is reading the rules, and for us that is all that really matters because no one wants the ethics police knocking! I am troubled by the fact that it is harder now to offer advice and assistance without full blown representation. I understand why, because so many inventors don't understand the pitfalls. Nevertheless, I would say that if you work with an inventor to help them prepare an application and then they ultimately fire you or decide not to proceed then I can't see how the PTO could force you to proceed. The client is the master, and we cannot ethically do things to force clients to stay with us. I think the problem is when you give advice and assistance without ever having an intention to file. I have done this in the past, but won't be doing it moving forward. In fact, the United Inventors Association has for years advised do-it-yourself type folks to seek just this service, so there is a clear advantage to having this service as long as it is appropriate and not misleading. But until the PTO can get the invention scams in line I think giving assistance will be more difficult. What I would suggest is entering into an agreement to assist in the drafting and filing of an application. If the inventor ultimately doesn't go through with filing or fires you then you should be in the clear. -Gene Mark-

I can’t imagine in this scenario that the attorney has violated the new rules. As far as I can tell the new rules do not actually require the attorney to file the application on behalf of an inventor they give assistance to, but that is the way OED is reading the rules, and for us that is all that really matters because no one wants the ethics police knocking!

I am troubled by the fact that it is harder now to offer advice and assistance without full blown representation. I understand why, because so many inventors don’t understand the pitfalls. Nevertheless, I would say that if you work with an inventor to help them prepare an application and then they ultimately fire you or decide not to proceed then I can’t see how the PTO could force you to proceed. The client is the master, and we cannot ethically do things to force clients to stay with us.

I think the problem is when you give advice and assistance without ever having an intention to file. I have done this in the past, but won’t be doing it moving forward. In fact, the United Inventors Association has for years advised do-it-yourself type folks to seek just this service, so there is a clear advantage to having this service as long as it is appropriate and not misleading. But until the PTO can get the invention scams in line I think giving assistance will be more difficult.

What I would suggest is entering into an agreement to assist in the drafting and filing of an application. If the inventor ultimately doesn’t go through with filing or fires you then you should be in the clear.

-Gene

]]> By: markmalek http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2008/09/10/legalzoom-patent-review-service-ends/id=198/#comment-114 markmalek Fri, 12 Sep 2008 20:48:29 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=198#comment-114 Here's an interesting scenario - An inventor hires a patent attorney and provides the patent attorney with a draft application that has been written. Thereafter, the patent attorney makes revisions to the draft application and gives it back to the inventor to review. The inventor then fires the patent attorney and files the application himself/herself. Has the patent attorney somehow violated the new rules? I certainly hope not! Here’s an interesting scenario – An inventor hires a patent attorney and provides the patent attorney with a draft application that has been written. Thereafter, the patent attorney makes revisions to the draft application and gives it back to the inventor to review. The inventor then fires the patent attorney and files the application himself/herself. Has the patent attorney somehow violated the new rules? I certainly hope not!

]]>