Welcome to the Forum for InventorSpot.com, the most popular invention related website in the world. Read our welcome message.
Moderators: Michelle, Scrupulous, citizen
by Average Inventor » Mon May 19, 2008 12:01 pm
-
Average Inventor - Brown Belt
- Posts: 569
- Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 9:52 am
- Location: Cleveland, OH
makeworldbetter wrote:This is from your web site:
(http://www.absolutelynew.com/inventors/ ... phase2.php)Invention Licensing
Once the patent is received and the research is completed showing the market potential for your patent, the next step is invention licensing. Invention licensing is a contractual arrangement in which the inventor (you) rent or sell the rights to your patent to another company who will then produce, test and distribute the product in exchange for royalties. Once you've received your patent, you can either sell it or license it. For-sale patents are acquired by a company through an assignment agreement, which completely transfers the ownership of the patent. With patent licensing, the ownership remains with the inventor; the licensing simply grants the company the rights to make (produce), use (test) and distribute (sell) the product. Finding manufacturers to license your invention can often be a long and frustrating process, which is why firms like AbsolutelyNew exist.
AbsolutelyNew can assist you in obtaining patent registration and finding a manufacturer to license your inventions. AbsolutelyNew has an excellent track record of helping inventors secure lucrative licensing deals for their inventions.
You require patent before licensing?
Yeah, isn't it a more prudent idea to find out it's marketability before applying for a patent? If there isn't a suitable market then why get a patent?
by makeworldbetter » Mon May 19, 2008 12:17 pm
-
makeworldbetter - Black Belt
- Posts: 1496
- Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:15 am
- Location: Silicon Valley
My point exactly
by makeworldbetter » Mon May 19, 2008 2:07 pm
-
makeworldbetter - Black Belt
- Posts: 1496
- Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:15 am
- Location: Silicon Valley
Mojo
I meant I agree with Average Inventor
I meant I agree with Average Inventor
by BenFranklin » Mon May 19, 2008 2:10 pm
- BenFranklin
- White Belt
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 1:53 pm
mojo62 wrote:The rake is a go in my opinion.
I was wondering about what sort of licensing agreements you work
with inventors. Is it more in line with a 50/50 split on royalties? If you manufacture yourself, what kind of agreement do you provide.
I have a product to show and tell in the near future. I have mixed
emotions on it's direction at the moment, but I will be making a decision
in the near term. I may be interested in talking to you about it.
I think this product would be a top infomercial seller if filmed properly.
Thanks,
Mojo62 and lcw_try -- you both asked about our licensing agreements and royalties. There is no standard answer here. The contract we sign with inventors is subject to negotiation and royalties are worked out on a case-by-case basis. But I will say that we negotiate very diligently with manufacturers when it comes to royalty rates and have made many, many inventors extremely happy. (Shameless plug: you can read our testimonials from happy inventors on this page -- http://www.absolutelynew.com/inventors/ ... onials.php)
Mojo62, would love to hear more about your idea. You can fill out our form here -- http://www.absolutelynew.com/contactus/ -- or email me directly -- mmcallister @ absolutelynew.com.
Thanks!
by BenFranklin » Mon May 19, 2008 2:52 pm
- BenFranklin
- White Belt
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 1:53 pm
Average Inventor wrote:
Yeah, isn't it a more prudent idea to find out it's marketability before applying for a patent? If there isn't a suitable market then why get a patent?
You're exactly right, Average Inventor. It's always prudent to explore an invention's marketability before investing in a patent. We ask our inventors to first have a patent attorney offer his/her opinion on the market to see if it's worth even getting a patent – too many inventors go in blind and some patent attorneys do not inform the inventor of the pitfalls, for obvious reasons. If the patent attorney comes back and says it's a "go," then we look to get the patent, develop the idea and start talking to manufacturers.
by makeworldbetter » Mon May 19, 2008 3:06 pm
-
makeworldbetter - Black Belt
- Posts: 1496
- Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:15 am
- Location: Silicon Valley
Not that we are complaining, we have a member who has 7 ideas got licensed with cost from him are under $100 each. He paid no patent fee, not event provisional patent fee on those ideas.
This method ease burden on inventor and enable him to work on more ideas.
I am not saying you should follow this approach, yet I think it's reasonable to start licensing process once certain due-diligent had been placed and the idea is patent pending (via provisional patent).
This method ease burden on inventor and enable him to work on more ideas.
I am not saying you should follow this approach, yet I think it's reasonable to start licensing process once certain due-diligent had been placed and the idea is patent pending (via provisional patent).
by BenFranklin » Mon May 19, 2008 3:35 pm
- BenFranklin
- White Belt
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 1:53 pm
makeworldbetter wrote:Not that we are complaining, we have a member who has 7 ideas got licensed with cost from him are under $100 each. He paid no patent fee, not event provisional patent fee on those ideas.
This method ease burden on inventor and enable him to work on more ideas.
I am not saying you should follow this approach, yet I think it's reasonable to start licensing process once certain due-diligent had been placed and the idea is patent pending (via provisional patent).
Good point, makeworldbetter. We often recommend that inventors get a provisional patent to start out with. That way they protect their idea while buying themselves time to get some traction and figure out if they want to pursue it further.
by BenFranklin » Tue May 20, 2008 8:30 am
- BenFranklin
- White Belt
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 1:53 pm
Michelle wrote:Hi Ben:
Welcome to the site.
If you would like to get involved in our community and get feedback on various inventions once in a while, we welcome that. The key is whether you are becoming a part of our site or just using it only for your or your company's benefit.
If I or any other active members feel you are just using this site as a means for advertising your company or spamming us with links to your website or otherwise taking advantage of the community here, we will ask you to take it somewhere else and strip references to your site off of these forums.
If you can show an invention in the forums, without linking to your site constantly and directing traffic there, that would work best. You are of course welcome like all active members to add your site to your signature.
So with that caution and request, welcome. We hope you will be a great resource and member of our community.
Michelle
Thanks Michelle. I completely understand. In fact I never intended to link to our site at all, and only did so after I was asked if I worked for the company (since our logo is in the corner of the video I shared). I wanted to be fully transparent, so I thought a brief description of what we did was in order.
Everyone's feedback on the Rake Up was very valuable and I shared it with our manufacturing team. As I mentioned, we have several other inventions that we're trying to decide if we want to pursue or not, so I'll be posting those in the near future as well. Thanks again to everyone for all their great feedback!
Until then...happy inventing!
21 posts
• Page 2 of 3 • 1, 2, 3