Patentable business process

JimIvey

Here's my brief FAQ on the topic:

http://www.isrlaw.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=5&Itemid=28

There's really not much to know.  If anything there prompts a question, ask away and I'll see if I can figure it out.

Regards.

Will

Thanks for getting back to me...so let's say I have a well-defined process for assigning ownership rights to people who make contributions to open source software developments.   For example, lone coder Jim contributes a block of OOP code...this code is tracked, a board assigns a contribution share and then he gets a percentage share of whatever profits this corporate entity receives.

JimIvey

First, it's important to remember to avoid giving too much detail about your actual invention.  It should be widely understood (and probably isn't mentioned here often enough -- although it is mentioned quite a bit) that no posting here establishes any attorney/client relationship and therefore no privilege should be assumed.

Now, let's look at the hypothetical situation you mentioned.  There are many business relationships in which profits shared are tied (as much as possible) to contributions.  In a number of startups here in the SF Bay Area, the contributions are, in fact, computer source code.  Think of engineers forming a corporation (e.g., a startup) and they each take shares according to perceived contribution.  

The only difference I see in what you're describing is that the source code is OSS and OOP.  It would be a difficult battle to convince an examiner that those variations are non-obvious.  I'm not saying it's impossible, just very challenging.  And, when speaking to an attorney, you should always interpret "challenging" as "expensive".  The two aren't synomous, but the former causes the latter.

Now, I'm imagining that such a hypothetical system would include some management scheme similar to sourceforge, but with ways to estimate contribution shares and to authenticate contributions and to distribute profit shares accordingly.  That system could very well have non-obvious aspects to it which are, accordingly, fertile ground for patents.

If I were working on that hypothetical case, that's where I'd focus my attention.  It's important to consider as many alternatives to the design choices in those aspects.

I hope that helps.

Regards.

Will

Thanks, I was thinking along the same lines.  I did a prior art search and didn't come up with anything similar to the exact idea I had.  I plan on writing the patent, mostly for practice, since I don't this will have much substantial value.  

That said, does posting here constitute prior art.  AS long as I file within a year.

JimIvey

Yes, posting here is public and searchable.  It doesn't act as prior art within the US, provided the posting here isn't before the "invention was made" and is within one year of the filing date.  But it's pretty clearly prior art anywhere else in the world, except perhaps Argentina which I understand also has a one-year grace period.

Regards.

Isaac

Doesn't Canada still have a grace period?  I think there are
other countries with grace periods, but few of them are as
unqualified as the US grace period.

JimIvey

Canada has some weird qualifications (weird relative to my US experience).  I don't have the details handy, but I recall vaguely something about the invention having to be made in Canada and/or your period of priority claimed under the Paris Convention counts against your grace period.  There's some thing in there that favors Canadian inventors.  

I think it's that the invention can not have been made more than one year prior to your Canadian application filing date -- regardless of priority under the Paris Convention.  So, if your invention was made Jan 1 '04 and you file in the US Jul 1, '04, your Canadian application must be filed before Jan 1, '05 rather than being able to claim the full year of priority by filing as late as Jul 1, '05.

My general recollection is that the grace period in Canada is not available to the vast majority of my clients given the typical fact scenario.  Or, at least, I try to act as if no priority is available there -- it's just safer.

Hopefully, someone else here can give a clearer explanation.

Regards.

Ladisla...

Quote

JimIvey

Quote

Ladisla...

but how come, I mean when U file a pct application the same application is not granted. Rather you have to file an appliaction in the designated country to be granted, therefore how can something that will never be granted, such as a PCT appliaction, be considered as a patent application?