Frank Posted April 21, 2012 Report Share Posted April 21, 2012 Sounds like if you make a bait and call it Art you can protect it under this loop hole if you got the money. A poor mans patent? But you still have to defend it. Anyone heard of this way of protecting your design? Not sure how a fish shape from nature can be copyrighted if the fish had it first. Frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Prager Posted April 21, 2012 Report Share Posted April 21, 2012 I had checked into that a few years ago when I was still making jewelry. You can actually copyright a group of them as a catalog and is very inexpensive. At the time about 6 years ago it was $25 per item. It shouldn't be confused with a patent but more like copyrighting a photo. I would think, if you can't afford a patent, then you certainly can't afford to defend it against infringement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdL Posted April 21, 2012 Report Share Posted April 21, 2012 Good luck with it. Look at the A' umbrella rig. Nows there's bunches of them. And then there's the offshore knockoffs. Seems to me if you wanna protect a design then keep it a secret. Once it's out there there's no respect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted April 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2012 Yes I was thinking on the same line as Richard. If it is not researched to see if it was done before then the one defending it would be in real trouble. The A rig thing has been done for years and years so not a problem there. I looked it up and saw that it included art and sculptures. But them like I said before, a fish had the look before any art did. Another differance I see is you dont have to have a unique or new design just a picture published somewhere. Frank 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonfishn Posted April 27, 2012 Report Share Posted April 27, 2012 Re the A-Rig, doubt very much if they'll be able to defend it IF they even get it, course, with the shape our governments in thye'll approve anything :-( Back to the A-Rig, it's nothing more than an adaptation of an existing design - an umbrella rig! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djs Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 I don't think anything other than money could protect your bait. Most of the lure patents are all the same. https://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=pts&hl=en&q=ininventor:%22Bobby+D.+King%22#hl=en&tbm=pts&sclient=psy-ab&q=ininventor:%22Bobby+D.+King%22&oq=ininventor:%22Bobby+D.+King%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_nf=1&gs_l=serp.12...0.0.0.2247.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0.ziZ8_K6kbpg&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=4239846dbdb4513a&biw=1024&bih=653 This guy had the wedge type tail patent almost six years before the huddleston patent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishoey Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Maybe this will help... I have looked into both patents and copyrights, as well as having a client who has gone through both routes with his products. First here is a link which will tell you everything you need to know about the topic straight from the horses mouth: http://www.uspto.gov/patents/index.jsp Understand there are (3) types of patents...design, utility and plant. Plant is for creating new strands of plants, so forget about this one. The two you need to concentrate on are design and utility. Example #1: You create a new design for a crankbait which the lip and body shape cause the bait to turn sideways twice, turn around and clack three times through internal chambers. This example you would definitely want a utility patent. Your design is unique and causes a new unique function to an existing bait. To thoroughly protect this lure you will probably need some outside help to fully document the makeup of the crankbait and each unique part. This can (probably should) be done with the help of your brother in-law who happens to be a patent attorney. If only we were all that lucky! I say this because utility patents can be complicated and "complicated" can equate to expensive. The expense can be through lawyer fees, submitting an incomplete patent and it is rejected or getting a patent which doesn't fully protect your design elements and it is stolen. Remember, ANY patent which is submitted and rejected for ANY reason (incomplete, someone already has a similar design...etc.) will result in the loss of all application fees. Basically you have to pay all over again to resubmit. Example #2: You design a new crankbait which the body shape looks like your hot girl friend from senior high school (the one that dumped you right before prom). It has a curvaceous body, hard wobble and looks Freak N' Awesome! Now other than "looks" this bait runs just like most cranks out there. It dives, wobbles, suspends and slowly rises. For this you have two choices. The first choice is to get a design patent. You can patent the "hourglass" shape and look. This will cost less than a utility patent (maybe 4k...not sure, check the link), and it is easier to apply for because it is...well...a design, which doesn't have parts or functions which are unique in creating a different action unlike anything else. A design patent is MUCH, stronger than a copyright which can be used for literature, art and design. Your second choice of course is copy righting the lure. The advantage to a copyright is it is cheaper (about $700 I believe) than the design patent. However on the downside, someone can change the design slightly...-say 15% fatter in the middle and two little dimples on the ends- and now you have an appointment to present your most convincing argument to a jury in hopes they will side with you after your noisy neighbor steals your thunder. The client I have is a friend and has used copyrights to protect the carvings on his furniture. He knows you can't utility patent a wooden beach chair and it is too pricy for the design patent, so he ops for the copyrights knowing someone could swipe his design and change it slightly. I know the A-rig has been mentioned above. His patent may have been for design, since umbrella rigs have been around for awhile. He may have sold the patent to Manns, in turn Manns may have sold it to everyone else. I'm totally speculating on this. I am mentioning this as something people do who patent their products. Also, I want to mention this...you cannot patent something and not DO something with it. This keeps the Warren Buffets of the world from creating patents on items and sitting on them to prevent competition. Check out the site I posted. It is a great resource! Hope this helps! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted April 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Great Info thank you for that. Is changing the color scheme or size considered change or just shape? If the bait was worth it there might be a reason to persue it. Thanks Frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishoey Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 I believe color scheme and shape will override a copyright. Size would be considered infringement. Think of it like this...you take a famous painting and reprint it to a larger 30" x 40". Nothing has truly changed; therefore it would be encroaching into someone’s copyright. If you went the design patent route, then someone who tries to copy your idea by slightly changing the shape will have a harder time winning their case. Color "names" can be trademarked (as well as names for baits). Let's say you have a new top water plug that looks like a frog and a mouse all in one. You call it "the frouse" and you paint it green and grey and call the color "fuzzy swamp". The names can be trademarked. Now... I am cruising sites and I see your lure for sale and I say to myself, "I'm going to copy this bait and sell it on my site!" I can do that (because there isn't a patent or copyright), however I darn sure can't call it by the same name or color which has been trademarked. I can copy it exactly, but I can't use the names. So, the branding you spent good money on is preserved somewhat, because everyone knows your lure by "the frouse" and my lure (stolen from you legally) is known as the "pugger Mouse". Check the site I posted below. It talks about trademarks (and patents...etc.). The gov set up a youtube channel for people like me who don't like to read! http://www.youtube.com/user/usptovideo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atijigs Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Is there any recourse if a person steals your design and patents it behind your back? I have pics, emails and all correspondence. I read about the bait in the paper along with a bs story about how he came up with the idea. He has been going to various sport shows saying the patent has been approved. I can't believe it could be approved that fast. I was made aware of the newspaper articles by people I had sold the lure to before I ever met this guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishoey Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Unfortunately, if he truly beat you to the patent office, there isn't much you can do. It becomes a matter of who filled out the paperwork first (paid the fee). I believe the "hula hoop" was never patented and was stolen from the creator. The person with the patent can actually sue the original creator for lost profits, claiming they are producing their patented item. From what I have read it does take awhile to receive a patent. If he filed the paperwork and paid the fee it becomes "patent pending" stage until it is approved. The fact that he is telling people it is patented, may be a sign it isn't. Do a patent search with his name, company type of lure and narrow the search between dates, i.e. 2009-2010. If it is something you want to pursue, contact an attorney for help. Again, he might not even have filed or it could be rejected and he has to resubmit. In that case you might have a chance. Knowledge is power, so be sure to read the links I posted. Good luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBehr Posted April 30, 2012 Report Share Posted April 30, 2012 You can challenge the patent after it is granted by presenting "prior art" showing that you have been practicing the idea....Including your correspondence with the other party would really put a dent in it! It would invalidate the patent (if it was approved). If you can figure out who the examiner is (of the applied for patent) you can attempt to present him with relevant information after the patent is "published". Sometimes they will accept information from others, sometimes the examiner has too big of an ego. I would strongly recommend you work with a Patent Attorney and have them give you the proper...and timely advice! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishoey Posted May 2, 2012 Report Share Posted May 2, 2012 DeBehr is right and I stand corrected. Here is a link I came across from an attorney's website (take it for what it is worth) about the "Patent reform Act of 2011" and the ability of a third party to challenge a patent. I am not an attorney, nor do I play one on T.V.. Best to get this advice from a paid pro when your $ is on the line. http://tacticalip.com/2011/03/17/patent-reform-act-of-2011-part-4/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
