Pat, why, how, how much, and strength?

[Remundo]

Hello Grelinette

you should have asked us before signing ...

we don't know what you signed

[Grelinette]

Ha yes, sorry, this is the contract: HERE


Knowing that the "financier" wants to make the advances (industrial designs, research of prior art, etc.), according to the opinions that I had, being in the minority (23%) certain clauses of the contract would allow him to change the situation if the patent turns out to generate revenue (sale of licenses, etc.).

In short, it seems that this contract looks like a trap to motivate me to continue to provide the technical side to finalize the patent (improvements, prototyping, technical file, etc.), what I do, and as soon as everything is finalized, I will be kindly placed on the side of the road!…

I sensed the character to be quite opportunistic, and as I got around him during a meeting, I realized that he had certain questionable methods ... I am also surprised that he did not take more precaution. when he explains certain dubious commercial "manipulations" to his employees while I am at his side !!!!

What can I do to protect myself?

[Philippe Schutt]

you are supposed to assume 24% of the development expenses and in the future to collect 24% of the gains. The work of study and and creation is not costed, only the costs are costed.
Unless you pay for your time?

So if you don't spend anything but spend your time improving the system, you get nothing.

In any case, that's how I read it.

[Grelinette]

... The work of study and and creation is not quantified, only are the quantified expenses.
Unless you pay for your time?
So if you don't spend anything but spend your time improving the system, you get nothing ...

I do not understand what you mean !

For the study and creation work, I understand that this represents a cost that would have to be taken into account. It is therefore in my interest to renegotiate so that it is, but it will not be easy.

Not against I do not understand: "if you do not spend anything but spend your time improving the system, you are not entitled to anything ..."
I am indeed the only one to improve the system, make variants and prototypes, ...

What worries me most are the sentences:

1) "In the event of default, the distribution of the percentages may be revised downwards depending on the amounts invested ..."

et

2) "In the event of an action decision to be taken on the project, the majority will prevail"

For 1), the financier proposed to make the advances on everything, which puts me at odds with this clause,

and for 2) it will be simple for him, with his ironworker colleague, to decide to lower my%, knowing in addition that the financier and the ironworker are already associated on other matters ...

The more I rub shoulders with the financier, the more I discover that he has surprising or even dubious business methods ...

[Ahmed]

The more I rub shoulders with the financier, the more I discover that he has surprising or even dubious business methods ...

Dog petting gives fleas popular wisdom says ...

[Philippe Schutt]

For the study and creation work, I understand that this represents a cost that would have to be taken into account. It is therefore in my interest to renegotiate so that it is, but it will not be easy.

Not against I do not understand: "if you do not spend anything but spend your time improving the system, you are not entitled to anything ..."
I am indeed the only one to improve the system, make variants and prototypes, ...

Well your improvement time will be added to the creation time, all of which will bring you nothing ...

What worries me most are the sentences:

1) "In the event of default, the distribution of the percentages may be revised downwards depending on the amounts invested ..."

We can anticipate that your associates will ask you to pay 24% of the bills. If you don't pay you lose your patent rights.

2) "In the event of an action decision to be taken on the project, the majority will prevail"
and for 2) it will be simple for him, with his ironworker colleague, to decide to lower my%, knowing in addition that the financier and the ironworker are already associated on other matters ...
...

they can decide to incur costs, you cannot follow, so you are ousted.
In my opinion, it is necessary to stop developing with them, and possibly to engage them in a false track.

[Grelinette]

We can anticipate that your associates will ask you to pay 24% of the bills. If you don't pay you lose your patent rights.

This is what I fear! The contract however stipulates:

These 2 sentences contradict each other, but actually since they have the majority, they can decide to opt for the decrease of%.

... they can decide to incur costs, you cannot follow, therefore you are ousted.
In my opinion, it is necessary to stop developing with them, and possibly to engage them in a false track.

This is what I saw as an issue, without really knowing how to go about it, knowing that they now have the invention brief that I wrote. I can possibly try to get closer to the consulting engineer with whom I speak, but he may be embarrassed.
Does anyone know if spelling and grammatical errors can render a contract void. In my case it would be practical, there are lots of faults in the contract!

As a last resort, I planned to quickly make the invention public so that a patent could not be filed, but being careful not to put myself at fault with the clause which says:



That said, this clause does not speak of are, but simply compensation !

At worst I pay my share of the expenses (24%), so a public broadcast limits the expenses, and then I continue my snowman to develop my systems of equestrian teams by avoiding to meet financial sharks!

I hope my mishap will serve others!

(Nb: for those it may concern, here is a questionable business practice that I have just discovered (practiced by the financier): send an urgent RAR letter with a false address written in pencil to have a return from La Poste, then delete the wrong address to write the right one and make it appear that the mail was sent on time but La Poste did not deliver it !!! Smart and sneaky to save time.)


Apart from the fact that it is very unpleasant to realize that we are being eaten away by associates who have put you in confidence to set you a trap, the world of property and intellectual property and strategies implemented is captivating!
Here are some strategies of large groups (of course, I do not play in the same court as these organized armies):
http://www.usinenouvelle.com/article/l- ... ts.N159301

However, there seem to be tips in this article that I can use to defend myself. I will read it in detail this evening.

[Grelinette]

The article of which I speak in my previous comment being perfectly in the subject and fascinating, I publish it here:

Usinenouvelle.com

THE ART OF WAR ... PATENTS
By BY AURÉLIE BARBAUX, WITH EDITORIAL - Posted on September 22, 2011 | The New Factory n ° 3254

On the world markets, industrial property has turned into a huge field of operation: lightning maneuvers, counterattacks, scorched earth, minefields ... Any blow is allowed.

In terms of industrial property, there will be a before and after the summer of 2011. The offensive strategies deployed by the global high-tech giants, the strength of the alliances and the enormous sums committed to acquire patent portfolios should not not just make you dizzy. These great maneuvers are all alerts for the rest of the industry. They point in particular to three major changes.

The first ? Industrial property is no longer primarily a weapon of defense. "There is no longer any equivalence between patent clusters and innovation," observes Yann Ménière, economist at Cerna Mine Paris Tech. In particular in new technologies, patent portfolios serve as a dissuasive weapon as much as conquering the market. "

The second ? These high-profile legal and financial battles reminded shareholders and investors of the importance of industrial property. It is only to see the progression on the Kodak Stock Exchange at the announcement of its patent license program. "From now on, the bosses' performance will also be evaluated in terms of their company's patent portfolios," warns Patrick Pierre, chairman of the board of directors of Avenium. You might as well prepare for it. "The new rules of the game will play on the organization of our R&D," warns Jean-Luc Beylat, director of Bell Labs at Alcatel-Lucent.

Finally, these giants who compete with thousands of patents and billions of dollars arrive in other markets, such as energy and the smart home. "Historical players in these sectors, such as Siemens, ABB and Schneider Electric do not yet know how to deploy patent strategies to protect their market," observes Patrick Pierre. One thing is for sure. By studying the ten most successful patent strategies of the moment, they will inevitably come to a conclusion. They will have to put the means up to the challenges to maintain their market share.

THE BLITZKRIEG

Apple has understood this. A good referral for infringement is much faster than a trial for patent infringement. To block its main competitor on the shelves, the Korean Samsung, the Californian waged a real legal flash war by filing a complaint with several jurisdictions in Europe. The court in Düsseldorf (Germany) was seized in summary proceedings for a copy. On August 9, 2011, the German judge ruled that the design of the Samsung Galaxy Tab effectively infringed Apple's intellectual property and temporarily blocked sales across the European Union. With the exception of the Netherlands, where a separate procedure is underway. But Apple's quick win will only be partial. On August 10, following an action by Samsung, the ban only applies to Germany. Decision confirmed on September 9. "To be valid, the German court decision must be validated by each country," explains Pierre-Louis Desormière, industrial property advisor to the Beau de Loménie firm. Whatever. "There are also summary proceedings for patent infringement, but they are much more difficult to conduct because it is necessary to present to the judge a dossier that is quick to assess," specifies Philippe Verriest, industrial property advisor to the firm Germain and Moreau. A difficulty surpassed by Apple in the Netherlands. The court in The Hague has indeed estimated on August 24 that Samsung was violating an Apple patent on how to scroll photos on the screen on its smartphones Galaxy S, SII and Ace. The court banned the sale in European countries where the patent was filed, from October 13. Meanwhile, Samsung, which has counterattacked with patent infringement procedures in ten countries, is awaiting hearings.

THE FORTRESS

Nespresso was a veritable “cash machine” of 2,7 billion euros in 2010, with profitability worthy of luxury. To protect this closed system of coffee machines and pods exclusively manufactured and sold by it, Nestlé has adopted an unusual strategy in the food industry. It has built up a bulwark of 70 families of patents, covering both the machine and the pod. They are registered in all the countries where the brand is present. "Nestlé has not stayed on its achievements and has filed new patents on the sealing of capsules, cartridge filters ...", notes Pierre Breesé, European patent attorney. Minimal improvements that resulted in patent clusters - 1 in total! - making Nespresso an almost unassailable fortress. The strategy worked effectively until ... 700. Jean-Paul Gaillard, ex-boss of Nespresso, then created the Ethical Coffee Company (ECC). He knows which patents will fall into the public domain, and when. He launched pods compatible with the Nespresso machine, soon followed by the American giant Sara Lee. "As for generic drugs, competitors always launch before the patent falls into the public domain to be the first impetrant," analyzes Patrick Pierre, chairman of the board of Avenium Consulting. To prepare their coup, and assess the risk of launching a competing product, these companies use "freedom to operate" teams, which study existing patents. Faced with this competition, Nestlé defended tooth and nail its business in court. Objective: sell as little as possible and as late as possible ... while trying to "select" its competitors. Because, for the Swiss giant, it is also important not to let the first small operator come to develop low-quality pods. On the other hand, serious competitors can help it develop the market. Its share will decrease, of course, but if the market is growing strongly, Nestlé will still be a winner.

PATRICK DENIEL

THE SUBMARINE

To advance your pawns without being spotted, there are two solutions. The first is that adopted by Technicolor. As soon as an algorithm is ready, the manufacturer licenses it to small companies which integrate it into their innovative system, which large electronics manufacturers are fond of. They therefore use Technicolor patents without knowing it. In the event of litigation, French thus has a means of pressure. "Above all, this strategy allows us to reduce the time to market for a technology," explains Gary Donnan, Director of Technology and Research. If it is one of our business units that markets the application, it takes seven or eight years. In this way, it arrives in equipment in three to four years ”. The second solution consists in discreetly acquiring patents or licenses, to attack at the appropriate time. The Taiwanese HTC seems to try it. He has just bought the portfolio of ADC ($ 75 million), that of Dashwire (18,5 million) and that of S3 Graphics (300 million), as well as some patents from Google. Its goal ? Torpedo Apple.

BURNED EARTH

You would think that by filing more than 8 patents a year, IBM takes care to protect all the innovations that come out of its labs. It is not so. "Even IBM does not have the means to deposit everything," explains Philippe Verriest, industrial property attorney for the firm Germain and Moreau. But what he does not deposit, he discloses through scientific publications for example. It thus prevents competitors from filing patents on these subjects. Because, in the American system, the publication proves the anteriority of inventions. In this scorched earth strategy, IBM goes even further. In January 500, the American launched, with Sony, Nokia and other ICT manufacturers, the “eco-patent commons” initiative. Each of the industrial partners publishes there a list of its environmental patents, of which it releases the rights. Everyone is therefore free to use them, without risk of patent infringement and without paying royalties. Another way to cut the grass under the feet of competitors, who would like to take advantage of this emerging market.

YALTA

"When it comes to entering a new market, manufacturers have understood that it is better to agree on a standard, rather than having each one's own," explains Yann Ménière, economist, researcher at Cerna, the industrial economics center of Mines ParisTech. Consortia are therefore created which develop all packaged solutions, which they will offer to standardization organizations. Thus, patents are directly included in the standard. The industrialists of the consortium only have to collect the royalties. For 3G technology, the cumulative license fees would be equivalent to 20% of the price of a smartphone! And it is the American Qualcomm which gets the best out of the game. But the Chinese, who had tried to launch their own 3G standard and failed, learned the lesson. For 4G, Huawei and ZTE have both successfully established themselves in the new standard. They claim to hold 10 to 20% of LTE (Long term evolution) patents. The rest goes mainly to Alcatel Lucent and Ericsson. “Cross-licensing agreements have already been made between the six or seven major players, who will have nothing more to spend. On the other hand, the little ones will have to pay to use the technology ”, specifies Lin Cheng, general manager EMEA of ZTE

ARMADA

Unthinkable, and yet ... To prevent Google from getting their hands on the 6 Nortel patents, a veritable war treasure, we witnessed an alliance as unexpected as it is appropriate. When, at the end of June 000, the auction started, Google became a favorite. Opposite him are Apple, Intel, the Rockstar Bidco consortium of Microsoft, RIM, Sony, Ericsson, and another led by RPX, a patent fund. But very quickly Rockstar Bidco withdrew. Apple prevents them by joining them. After three days of battle, the Google ship surrenders to this unlikely armada. Rockstar Bidco won, but the fighters spent $ 2011 billion. By sharing the spoils, RIM and Ericsson obtain a license on all the patents for 4,5 billion dollars. And Apple gets its hands, among other things, on 1,1G patents, for 4 billion.

THE HEIST

Appropriate the discoveries of others ... This is the strategy of the heist led by the American biotechnology company Myriad. In 1995, she claimed authorship of two genes on the eve of the publication in the journal "Nature" of the DNA sequence of one of them, the BRCA2 gene, by the British Institute for Research on Cancer. Thanks to these patents on genes whose mutations signal a predisposition to breast and ovarian cancers, Myriad imposes exclusive licenses at high prices on laboratories and institutions wishing to carry out screening. Despite the opposition of several organizations, including the Institut Curie, these patents were partially confirmed by the European Patent Office in 2008. In the United States, after several reversals, justice also granted Myriad the right this summer to keep them. Allowing it to keep its monopoly.

GAELLE FLEITOUR

DIPLOMACY

Microsoft has never played the aggressive card in the patent field. His first-line attacks are rare, the publisher generally contenting himself with fighting back. Same strategy vis-à-vis Google, whose Android operating system would violate its patents. Rather than attack, it negotiates with Android users. Paid diplomacy. In April 2010, HTC was the first to sign an agreement with Microsoft, and would pay five dollars per Android smartphone sold. With this unique manufacturer, the publisher already earns more with Android than with Windows Phone! Onkyo, Velocity Micro, General Dynamics Itronix will follow. In September 2011, Acer and Viewsonic in turn agreed to increase Microsoft's Android business, and negotiations were under way with Samsung. Others, in the minority, resist and take the risk of the trial. This is the case of the bookseller and manufacturer of reading lights Barnes and Noble. Finally, the choice of a more subdued approach is doubly successful. Microsoft is making money from the sales of one of its main competitors and destroys the argument of its free open source OS (unlicensed) put forward by Google.

PATRICE DESSMEDT

THE SHIELD

Google no longer had a choice. To protect its Android operating system (OS), distributed in open source mode, it needed ... patents. Not to protect his invention, but as a weapon of deterrence, even negotiation. Indeed, Android would violate a number of patents held by competitors, including Gemalto and Microsoft [see p. 43]. “Google's goal is to achieve a kind of 'peace of the brave'. With the argument: "If you attack Android, I can counter-attack," "analyzes Patrick Pierre, chairman of the board of Avenium, a patent strategy consulting firm. But he needs weapons. Google therefore seeks to get its hands on the patents of Canadian Nortel, in liquidation. "Out of the question", proclaimed together its main competitors [see p. 42]. Whatever. Google negotiated the buyout of 1 patents from IBM. And a few days later, Google bought Motorola Mobility and its 000 patents for $ 17 billion. “An investment commensurate with the commercial issue,” observes Patrick Pierre. Above all, Motorola's patents are treasures. Google has already sold 000 to HTC, to help counter Apple, one of the members of the armada. To further enrich its arsenal, Google has just negotiated 12,5 new IBM patents. Who rubs it ...

THE MINING FIELD

To prevent access of a technology to competition, what better than to cover the market area associated with patent bombs. Of course, the strategy is never displayed. But the race for patents, particularly “green”, in which the two major French car manufacturers, Renault and PSA Peugeot Citroën, have engaged, suggests that they have adopted it. "In the electric car sector, the technologies may not yet be sufficiently advanced for standards to be released and for the manufacturers to come to an agreement in consortia [read p. 42] ”, explains Laurence Joly, director of the industrial property observatory of the INPI. The status quo, observed in recent years in the sector, could therefore be undermined.

FOUR STRATEGIES TO TRY YOUR WORLD

The patent remains above all a defensive weapon, to guarantee a monopoly and consequently the related market. If it is dominant, or pioneer, and well protected by so-called improvement patents, it effectively makes it possible to control an economic sector. But beware of blocking patents, which are not intended to be exploited. They can help freeze technology. A little tour of the traps that companies set.

The lure

Decoy patents can make competitors believe that the land has been duly trapped. They often do not cover any real invention. But as the issuance procedures - in France in particular - do not provide for a substantive examination ... the titles are issued and can give the impression that the time required for the bluff. Even if, in the long term, the competitors can override these decoy patents, they do not know it from the start. Especially since the patent editor may have made the description obscure. It is also possible to take out patents solely for the purpose of making your competitors believe that you are about to exploit a technology. The goal being that the competition launches out in a frantic race to catch it. And also weakens. An expensive maneuver, however.

The ambush

The description of a patent can also voluntarily seek to mislead the watch teams. The description may not necessarily reflect the best technical solution. Some editors can even go so far as to place a false figure next to the summary of the invention, so that it is rejected or wrongly retained! But these are one shot traps. The fooled competitor will be more attentive the next time.

The barricade

More traditional, but reserved for the wealthy, the dam aims to prevent competition from accessing technology by covering the market area associated with patent bombs. Some can actually be exploited by the patentee, while the others protect variants, which could have been imagined by third parties in order to circumvent the few exploited patents.

The encirclement

A variant of the dam, the encirclement consists in identifying the competitor's basic patent with improvement certificates. The holder of the basic patent thus loses all freedom of action, because he can no longer exploit it without the license of one or other of the development patents. So he often decides not to use his patent anymore. The fact remains that disinformation or a barrage can be recognized as an abuse of rights by a court. But before the judgment is rendered, the damage is done.
THE CHOICE OF WEAPONS

Industrial property titles are only valid and defensible in the countries where they are registered. Patents protect inventions twenty years after their filing (if payment of the annuities). They can be extended by seven years for drugs. Designs protect the appearance of a product or its parts for five years, renewable up to twenty-five years. The "Community design" is valid for the whole of Europe. Copyright runs until seventy years after the death of the author. It also covers software, but the Americans have granted software patents since 1981. Since 2001, the European Patent Office has also done so, but there are still uncertainties about the value of these titles. Trademarks are protected for ten years, renewable indefinitely, but fall apart if they are not used. Corporate names, trade names and signs arise from first use.

[Philippe Schutt]

The honest method would be that your work is valued. You should see with your accountant how to do this.

From what I read, you can stop developing with them, and file improvement patents, which will force them to compose, or disclose the improvements which will make the initial patent lose its value.

Your contract does not speak either of the investments of manufacture and marketing, nor of the generated profits which will be in any case in the pocket of your businessman.

[chatelot16]

if you want to divulge everything to rush into the stretcher, it's not difficult: you just have to do it under another nickname! disclosing makes patent impossible, no matter who discloses

of course avoid using exactly the same text: it is better to write differently with different spelling mistakes

of course it's a shame to disclose anonymously by not even giving yourself the honor of being the inventor ... well it can be disclosed with a nickname, and indicate your real name a little later