US Patent up for review

The US version of one of my WIPO patent applications, Musical Button-Field Layout for Alphanumeric Keyboards, has recently been assigned for examination.

I'm too broke to pay a patent attorney to "prosecute" (drive forward) this patent application -- heck, Thumtronics already owes patent attorneys more than it (or I) can repay. However, if I can prosecute it myself for a couple of hundred bucks and a couple of dozen hours, I can probably do that, on behalf of iGetIt! Music.

The twist claimed by this patent application is not just the Wicki-to-QWERTY mapping, but rather, mapping each note of tonic solfa (in the Wicki pattern) to the QWERTY keyboard, and relying on the QWERTY keyboard's underlying computational power to map these intervals to the correct pitches, given a common reference pitch. Hence, "La" always maps to the same button on the QWERTY keyboard, but that button does not always map to the same pitch. It's a "movable Do keyboard," right there on your computer.

If I'd realized, before starting the Thummer project, that I could map Wicki's note-layout to an alphanumeric keyboard as described in this patent application, then I might have focused on a software-only product from the outset, and saved myself a fortune in hardware-development costs.

Based on my experience with Thumtronics, here's my advice to budding inventors:

1. One language, one market. If you're a native speaker of English, file only in the USA (although perhaps via WIPO's international process, because it gives you more time).  If Japanese, in Japan only, and if Chinese, in China only. If you're European, file in the USA only, until Europe adopts a single unified patent system that enables prosecuting (i.e., "driving forward") a single pan-Euopean patent in a single language. 
2. Don't hire a patent attorney. Instead, (a) carefully read dozens of patents related to the one you expect to file, paying particular attention to the specialized language used, (b) carefully compose your own patent description, claims, and drawings, based on what you learned from that study, and finally (c) buy the latest version of Patent It Yourself, and follow its instructions to the letter.

Thumtronics broke both of these rules, and the resulting expenses were an unsustainable drain on its finances. According to LegalZoom, "thousands of inventions are patented each year but only a minuscule amount actually generate substantial, if any, profits." Too true.

With such low odds of returning any value, the cost of patenting must be equally low for patents to be worth filing at all.

All of the patent attorneys in the world will tell you the same lie: that they cannot possibly estimate the cost of prosecuting your patent; that every patent is different; and that the best thing to do is to go ahead and get the process started. This is complete crap. Given all of the patents that have been filed, it is surely possible to find the average cost (and standard deviation) of patent filing by number of claims, number of descriptive pages, number of drawings, number of countries, number of languages, etc. This is basic data-mining.

However, if starry-eyed inventors knew in advance what the process might cost, they would be less likely to invest in it. Hence, it is in the patent attorney's interest to keep the costs of the process as opaque as possible, while leaving its early stages inexpensive. It's a scam, made worse by the high barriers to entry erected to limit entry to patent attorney's profession, thereby limiting competition and increasing the margins that patent attorneys can charge.

As with so many other aspects of modern global capitalism, the patent system has been skewed away from "defending the rights of the little guy" towards being a tool for their oppression. The big guys can afford to work the legislative/industrial system, in which legislators sell -- for "campaign contributions" and other graft -- the right to expropriate money from the little guys. The little guys just get screwed.

So, why bother to invent at all? Well, because -- as Canada Bill Jones is quoted as saying -- "Of course the game is rigged!  But it's the only game in town, and if you don't bet, you can't win."

Rather than spending a fortune on patent attorneys, I submit that one should file one's own patents -- keeping the cost as low as possible. Then, once you've produced a product based on the patent that is generating a profit stream, buy patent insurance to defend those profits. A million-dollar policy currently costs around US$25K/year.

The most carefully-crafted patent is worthless if you can't afford to defend it, whereas even a poorly-crafted patent, backed up by a million-dollar defense fund, will deter infringers.

As always, while justice whispers, money talks.