The Invent Blog®

Matt Buchanan’s new blog on “Friday fun – Edison’s mark” (referring to terms and conditions Edison used on a marking plate for his Amberola Phonograph).

At least that is what Google, in reviewing Copyright renewals is finding. See Google Book Search Blog on US copyright renewal records available for download.

Google’s latest announcement (the topic of that post) was scraping together a 56MB XML file (zipped) containing a list of the books that were not renewed.

The fact that Google is tracking such information and (presumably) scanning those public domain books for online reading…is an unbelievable thing.

Above the Law has a post up on “Where the Lawyers Eat Out” which contains a list of “recommendations for restaurants in various Biglaw cities.”

Something tells me that ‘if’ Boise was a “Biglaw city” that this local restaurant would probably not make the list: The Crescent “NO LAWYERS” Bar & Grill. Not because of the food/service, but because of their “no lawyers” policy. Their menu (menu link: here) includes:

LAWYER FRIES — “You know that lawyers don’t have any!” Some people call them Rocky Mtn. Oysters or Bull Fries. We “lovingly” call them lawyer fries. Served with hot mustard. $8.95

The menu even explains that the restaurant’s name came after a legal dispute with a neighbor (attorney) over the bar owner wanting to build a swimming pool in his backyard (and the attorney fighting him over it). Only in Idaho….

Techdirt: Expensive Patent Attorneys Know How To Cut & Paste, But Not Search & Replace

It isn’t anymore…hasn’t been for a few years. My fellow practitioners know exactly what I mean.

Then, I read this:

…The SPE indicated that it was the policy in his Art Group not to issue
any patents any more. In fact, some examiners in this unidentified Art
Group have not issued a single patent in over 2 years!

PLI Patent Practice Center Blog on “Quality Review Shutting Down the USPTO.”

Wonderful.

As Gene says in that post:

If you have
come across any suspicious activity that might suggest there are
examiners, supervisors or Art Groups that are refusing to issue any
patents please let me know. If you have seen a ridiculous rejection
let me know. I am happy to keep all sources confidential.

Apparently, quite a few people have sent Gene emails about that post (see “More Quality Review Madness“). If you’ve seen something odd…you might want to contact Gene too.

Three years ago I wrote a post on the ReThink(IP) blog on “Insourcing Patent Work” where I talked about “insourcing,” namely rather than sending patent work overseas, instead sending it inland (US) to smaller metropolitan areas where hourly rates and costs in general are less. [note: I apparently misuse the word “insourcing” in that piece ("correct" definition here), perhaps “farm-sourcing” would have been a better word.]

That one post has, over the past few years, has resulted in handfuls of emails from Indian firms arguing with me, telling me that I am wrong…arguing that sending work to India is the best thing (to them?) ever.

To me, the biggest annoyance with the topic is all of the “Chicken Little” patent attorneys running around worrying that their jobs are going to India. I’ve never been able to understand why these same Chicken Little’s don’t worry about Canada, which, last time I checked has many patent practitioners that speak perfect English and generally are more inexpensive than US practitioners. Your jobs aren’t going to India (nor Canada), so relax.

A couple of months ago I received an email from Mark Ross (mross@law-scribe.com) at LawScribe. At first I thought it was another “you’re wrong about India” email, but it turns out that Mark is a fellow law blogger (he writes the “Legal Process Outsourcing” blog). I traded a few emails with Mark, one of which used the term “farm-sourcing.” We had a fun discussion of “farm-sourcing,” culminating in a phone conversation. It turns out Mark is from the U.K., living in Southern California, working with LawScribe. Nice guy.

On a whim, I asked Mark what they charged for patent and trademark searching services and for example search reports. He sent me a brochure and a couple example searches. The searches were shockingly good for the price, as good as (if not better) than my US searcher gives me, and was priced a little higher than my US searcher charges (my US guy is very economical). The kicker was that Mark touted a 1-3 day turn around (instead of 1-3 weeks). Hmm…how many of my clients would prefer the quicker turn around, same quality and same cost?

Perhaps that is what I didn’t get about “outsourcing.” It isn’t about the price (which in this case was competitive with what I was paying in the US). It isn’t about quality (the quality I can get from US searchers is fine). It’s about speed. Perhaps you can have “cheap, fast and good,” instead of just two of the three.

Over the past couple of months (after having them sign a confidentiality agreement), I have sent LawScribe a number of searches (both trademarks and patents). Each time, I have been impressed with the quality of work and the quick turn around. Based on my experience, I’m now at the point where I propose the Indian option to most of my clients when they ask me to perform a search. Surprisingly, every patent client I’ve proposed it to as an option (same price, same quality, but weeks faster) has chosen the India route. Perhaps our (lawyers’) belief that clients don’t want outsourcing is unjustified.

Sure, I know that some of my clients will not consider it as an option. For those clients, I don’t propose it…we’ll keep doing our searching the old fashioned way. But for everyone else…because of the quick turn around, it is something to discuss with them.

So, in summary, I have to (eat crow and) admit that outsourcing can be a tool that a “farm-sourcer” uses to deliver faster service.

[Update: "Applicants and registered patent practitioners are reminded that the export of subject matter abroad pursuant to a license from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), such as a foreign filing license, is limited to purposes related to the filing of foreign patent applications. Applicants who are considering exporting subject matter abroad for the preparation of patent applications to be filed in the United States should contact the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) at the Department of Commerce for the appropriate clearances." See: Scope of Foreign Filing Licenses, Notice [PDF] (23Jul2008).]

Excellent article for practitioners (and their bookkeepers) doing work for foreign clients — ABA Law Practice Magazine on Dollars to Dinars: Billing and Collecting in a Global Market

The world is flat. Thomas Friedman made the case for it in his best-seller of that title, and every day the news brings more evidence that the global marketplace is a reality. If you’re thinking of taking advantage of the new playing field by seeking work from foreign clients, here are issues to consider in getting paid for that work.

I’ve really enjoyed my friendship with fellow patent attorney Doug Sorocco (PHOSITA blog) over the past few years…particularly how we rib one another about where we live (me – Idaho, him – Oklahoma). In that he is on vacation while the rest of us are at work….Doug, this one is for you:

• Rolf Claessen’s new patent pdf download tool. http://www.ipnewsflash.com/get_pdf.php
• PatentRetriever. http://www.patentretriever.com/

Notice of Town Hall Meeting on the Protection of Industrial Designs [signed 28 May 2008] [PDF] (29May2008)
USPTO Welcomes New Member to Management Team (28May2008)