To patent ... if you can afford it and are pretty sure that the revenues will be higher than the costs. In practice that most of the times means ... not patent.
You are a Canadian. I don't know how things are over there. But here in Europe it currently is a VERY HOT ISSUE. Introductory websites:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1770806,00.asphttp://petition.eurolinux.org/index.htmlhttp://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=407Personally, I think I have some stuff in my shareware product that deserves to be patented. However, the costs are enormous, at least for me. If I were a big company, it would be a no-brainer.
>Anybody here have experience in the patenting department?
>
>What is patentable? What is not? I mean in a patentable process is everything patented (the way things work, the look and feel...) or should different patents be applied to different aspects of what needs to be patented?
>
>Is it worth it to patent or is this only reserved to the big corporations because they're the only one to have the financial resources to fight for their rights?
>
>What are the positive and negative sides to such a process?
>
>Thank you for additional feedback on things I could've forgotten.
Groet,
Peter de Valença
Constructive frustration is the breeding ground of genius.
If there’s no willingness to moderate for the sake of good debate, then I have no willingness to debate at all.
Let's develop superb standards that will end the holy wars.
"There are three types of people: Alphas and Betas", said the beta decisively.
If you find this message rude or offensive or stupid, please take a step away from the keyboard and try to think calmly about an eventual a possible alternative explanation of my message.
