Patenting small boat in EU

[icetreader]

The USPTO allowed my application for a utility patent on my "Twin Hull Personal Watercraft" (big name for a small boat), and will soon issue the patent.
Now I'm looking to keep patenting in additional countries, with the EU as my first priority.
Other possible countries: Japan, China, Australia etc.

Anyone interested in cooperating with me on such project please contact me directly at YR@wavewalk.com

Yoav Rosen
Wavewalk, Inc.
Newton, MA
USA

As I understand it you may be too late if you haven't filed in the foreign countries before the US patent issues. Filing in even a selected group of foreign countries is above $30,000...
Congratulations on your US patent!

[icetreader]

Thanks :-)

I took care of the EU filing rights through a PCT application.
Based on my US experience it looks like the EU patenting process for this invention shouldn't be that difficult - I could take care of it from here.
The problem is the sum of $25-$30 K required for finalizing the patenting process in the EU, and later starting some initial business development there.
-As a US startup company I must focus on developing the market(s) here.

Yoav

You did the right thing and I hope you find what you need to complete the filing in Europe.
The patent process is stacked against us small inventors! From the 4-5,oooUS for filing and paying the issue fee to the extortion of patent maintainance fees.
Then you have to consider the nightmare of a big corporation that wants to steal it and the defense costs. It's better today than 20 years ago but still stacked against the little guy. Good Luck!

[icetreader]

Doug,
I couldn't agree more-
Patenting this boat in the US went smoothly and was relatively cheap, but the situation in Europe struck me as bizarre: In fact, small inventors are not given a real chance of patenting their inventions across the whole EU. You've probably noticed that many foreign inventors who patent their inventions in the USA don't even bother to patent them in their home countries...
I suppose that with the PCT system the situation in the EU is now improved compared to what it was years ago, but it still doesn't make much sense.
Maybe American inventors should consider themselves lucky after all?

Yoav

[Nels Tomlinson]

Now that you've spent the money on your patent, maybe you should see what Don Lancaster, an old electronics hardware engineer, has to say about them, at http://www.tinaja.com/patnt01.asp .

His thesis is that for most people and for most inventions, patents are useless and expensive at best, and generally counter-productive. That's in electronics, which is new enough that sometimes there really is a new idea. In boats, I'm sure there is a patent out there which isn't invalidated by the prior art embodied in some indigenous boat or one of Nat Herreshoff's designs, but I haven't seen it.

Unfortunately, U.S. patent examiners are rewarded for awarding patents, with the result that any crap is probably going to get approved if the paperwork is filled out correctly. There have recently been patents awarded on a method of swinging on a swing ( see here for the story), and similar silly, old, non-useful, obvious ``inventions''. Unfortunately, the USPTO is the laughing-stock of the world, and European patent offices don't always grant patents on things patented in the U.S.

Still, I'm sure that your invention is new, useful and non-obvious, and I hope it does you more good than the average patent.

[icetreader]

Hi Nels,
That guy knows what he's talking about.
While I was doing research on "prior art" in the field of this invention I had to scan hundreds of patents that were in most cases amusing at best. BTW I'm quoting some seventy products and patents in my application.
My impression is that the USPTO examiners try to do a good job and don't allow claims that easily. The problem is that in many cases inventors they "fall inlove" with their inventions and don't look at patenting in "cold" investment terms.
Considering all parameters it all boils down to one question: What is the real market value of the invention? After having checked this I think that patenting my boat in the USA was a good and necessary move.
It's my second patent so we were well prepared and the process went rather smoothly, resulting in a relatively small expense.
As for patenting in Europe, the much higher cost combined with the fact I'm likely to have less opportunities to develop that market from here makes a joint venture the solution of choice.
Yoav
Newton, MA