@T: ALWAYS THE TWAIN

Firstly, 360-2020′s patent claims cover over 30 unique and proprietary features. Secondly, I was recently involved with some friends’ scoping of a social network as well as at various IP conferences as part of my analysis about how to deal with one aspect of Project ART. There seem to be three schools of thought on IP:

(1.) There’s no point filing anything.

(2.) Let’s just build it with no project plan, no contractual responsibilities between the founder(s) and maybe look at filing something after the product launches.

(3.) File everything NOW.

It really boils down to the founder(s) preferences and how much they’re prepared to spend to file IP and enforce it. It also varies according to whether the founder(s) believe their product is unique, the market opportunity is sizable, whether they want to use the IP as leverage to attract investors, the likelihood of the patent being enforceable and how much they could earn from licensing their product. For example, there is little point IP filing a typewriter in this day and age when people are migrating towards touch mobile devices where they don’t have to change the ink ribbons or to buy paper or swap the carriage. Equally, there are valid reasons to IP file any pharmaceutical which can cure cancer, aging or diabetes. The different applicability and the sizes of the markets means that the IP considerations are different.

There is no black+white, hard+fast, do-this-and-you-will-become-billionaires rule about IP or about Internet entrepreneurialism. As with Life itself everything is in shades of gray or rainbows and some things simply happen out of coincidence rather than deliberate planning.

Still, I read with interest that Facebook has had patents granted for its newsfeed and user affinity towards applications:

*  http://gigaom.com/2010/02/25/facebook-granted-news-feed-patent/

* http://www.allfacebook.com/2010/02/facebook-awarded-patent-for-measuring-use-affinity-toward-applications/

*  http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebook_granted_patent_on_the_news_feed_-_this_co.php

I know that some of my friends don’t believe in IP so the Facebook patent may give them some pause for thought, and maybe they’ll realize that when I say that it should be considered I do so in the interests of protecting them from themselves.

Serious investors are unlikely to be interested or to get involved if what to do about IP has not even been considered.

That’s what’s happening out there.

“If you discussed 360-2020 with them, aren’t you afraid they’ll steal your ideas?”

This was after I met with some smart technologists and investors.

“Well, I stated clearly that 360-2020 is a registered trademark and the patent application for the system itself is filed,” I replied. “Also, without my involvement there is NO way anyone can replicate the 360-2020 system or business model since the most important and critical core of it is something only I know and can do.”

Unfortunately, this is the negative side of business: some unprincipled types try to steal your ideas, pass off your hard work and innovation as their own and then make money from it. Ideas and brainstorms themselves have no trademark, patent or other intellectual property rights. However, actual logos and systems do so wherein possible find a good IP lawyer and ask them for advice.

Yes, it costs quite a lot of money but may prove to be worthwhile.

As for being realistic about our inventions and the potential timelines involved, I refer to James Dyson the inventor of the Dyson vacuum cleaner:

The Dual Cyclone vacuum cleaner came from a simmering frustration that took nearly twenty-five years to boil over. I channelled this frustration into something practical. I started with a crude cardboard cyclone which appeared to work and this led to machined prototypes as I refined the design. Fifteen years and 5,127 prototypes later I had perfected a vacuum cleaner that didn’t lose suction, the Dual Cyclone. It took 15 years of swearing, struggling, creating, being knocked back by several short-sighted companies and inventing to get to this stage today — James Dyson

The positive aspect of sharing ideas with the RIGHT PEOPLE (i.e., smart, honorable and trustworthy) is that they can either help you accelerate and achieve the realization of your invention and / or they can introduce you to other people who can. The negative risks of sharing with the WRONG PEOPLE (i.e., clueless, dishonorable and untrustworthy) is that they will either steal your ideas and defame you in the process and / or they waste your time.

The latter has happened to me which explains a certain amount of wariness even if I am, by nature, an optimist and enjoy sharing knowhow.

It should also be noted that inventors can take measures to safeguard their brands and inventions but even the likes of Twitter can’t trademark “tweet”:

* http://www.mediabistro.com/webnewser/social_nets/tweet_trademarked_not_so_fast_124860.asp?c=rss

So what arose from my interactions with those smart technologists and investors?

They suggested some helpful options:

(1.) Computer algorithms worth looking into.

(2.) Some people to get in touch with.

(3.) HTML5.

Anyone who produces any type of monetizable work (business models, software designs, music, art, film scripts, etc.) should read the Intellectual Property guidelines provided by the Copyright Office of their respective countries as well as the Trademarks and Patents Offices. Here are some link examples:

· http://www.copyright.gov/

· http://www.ipo.gov.uk/copy.htm

· http://www.wipo.int/portal/index.html.en

· http://www.uspto.gov/

· http://www.ctmo.gov.cn/

· http://www.inpi.fr/

· http://www.patentoffice.nic.in/

Also worth keeping an eye on are these sites:

* http://www.hg.org/intell.html

* http://www.ip-watch.org/

* http://www.eff.org/

At times, it may seem as if copyright and IP don’t apply on the Internet with people downloading and sharing music / video / content files so freely but in reality INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT AND IP LAWS DO APPLY.

For the individual who’s producing original work it’s imperative they’re suitably informed of their rights and how their work is being commercially exploited (sometimes without a single US$ going to them).

Today, the French government voted in the lower house for a law that seeks to protect artists’ interests on the Internet more:

* http://www.france24.com/fr/20090513-projet-loi-hadopi-senat-adoption-assemblee-nationale-christine-albanel-UMP-PS-artistes

* http://www.lemonde.fr/technologies/article/2009/05/13/le-projet-de-loi-hadopi-definitivement-adopte_1192419_651865.html

* http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/technology/internet/13net.html

With Project ART we’re trying to create an innovative corporate structure, which will allow our art assets to appreciate in value within an art fund as well as via digital merchandizing mechanisms and for member-users to participate in the monetization of those digital assets, all complying with international asset management and IP laws. No other company yet provides the platform we’re aiming for so this will be fairly ground-breaking and needs the involvement of sound legal advice.

Whilst casting around for prospective law firms, I found myself on the Mishcon de Reya website:

Mishcon de Reya is the commercial law firm well-known for representing the likes of Princess Diana of Wales and Heather Mills. No, I’m not about to get a divorce; I would need to be married first for this to happen! They have an established Intellectual Property practice which is the area of law we want to get information on and were ranked #65 in the Times Top 100 UK companies in 2008 which is a good sign.

The site also caught my eye because it made me think, “We must be in the era of red-orange branding for sites. There’s Wolfram Alpha, True Knowledge and also Mishcon de Reya!” Previous years have seen these “in” colors, btw:

· silver wash (Apple, NYT)

· royal blue (most banks, Paypal, Plaxo)

· sky-blue + orange blush (Tripit, Skydeck, SearchMe, slideshare)

· apple green + aqua (Kosmix, the Conservative Party, twitter, hulu, Digg, delicious, Skype)

Hmmmn……..maybe digital success is contingent on color choice………………