[Patents] consultation questions

[gepicaam@cybercable.fr (gepicaam)]

> Let me state that in a more direct way :
> 0)- I fully understand that managers from SMEs are interested in you
> helping them patenting their algorithms if you tell them they can do it a=
nd
that it will be good for them.

It's not exactly what happens: First, SMEs are interested in patenting thei=
r
innovations, and then only they will contact a patent attorney=8A My first
proposal is often to conduct a search in order to take in count prior art
patent and competitors patents.


> 1)- However, the study that I point you to states that patents are of no =
use
to SMEs, because it offers them no guarantee.

I don=B9t agree. Many of my client became successful by using their patents i=
n
licensing and organizing their partnership=8A

> 2)- Any large company can launch its lawyers and sink the SME whenever
=FF they want.

It=B9s not exact. Small companies are not necessary sinking in such
situations. I can give you some examples=8A

> 3)- Consequently, patents are just sheets of paper for SMEs, that offer
=FF no guarantee to investors. It is more a lure than anything...

In some cases, you are right. Some patents are called =B3tigres en papier=B2.
But it investors have to verify the reality of the claimed protection.

> 4)- I understand well that some people may want to get hold on what does
> not belong to them. If the law could be changed to allow patenting of air
=FF breathing, I'm sure someone would do it quickly.

No comment.=20
>=20
=FF So my question is : do you say that the findings of this study are wrong?

This study is not in accordance with my feeling.


Bien cordialement

Pierre BREESE  pb@breese.fr
BREESE MAJEROWICZ 3, avenue de l'op=E9ra 75001 PARIS
T=E9l. 0147036777  Fax 0147036778  http://www.breese.fr