good idea no money
- Thread starter billion
- Start date
Rather than appearing to be cynical maybe it would be helpful to the OP if you offered some supportive and constructive suggestions?
Ray
Upvote
0
Why is that silly? are you an expert in software engineering, and the specialised knowledge it needs to make money.
Rather spend £3k know than £100k and find infringed patents
Upvote
0
As I've already said, the OP has provided so little information that there really isn't much to go on. If and when additional information comes to light, I may well make some useful suggestions (as evidenced by the fact that I'm watching this thread).
As for my cynicism, that's just part of the package, either live with it or killfile me.
Upvote
0
Rather spend a bit of time researching viability before spending a good few thousand and many, many months going down the patent route.
So many good ideas fail to get off the ground because the inventor is terrified of being copied, and goes down the patent route.
If someone has a genuinely good idea, the first thing to do is prove it. A good way of doing this is by getting other people (people who know what they're talking about) to agree with them, and agree to the point of investing in it. This can all be done at zero risk under NDA.
Upvote
0
Hi,
First thing I would recommend is to list the benefits that your solution will bring to an organisation. Identify the problems it solves, things it does better, potential cost savings etc. Doesn't matter how cool the software is if it doesn't meet a genuine business need.
Then I would spend a long time on google searching for comparisons. If there aren't any potential competitors, think about why? Is it because noone has thought of it, is it because there isn't a need, is it because it is a newly emerging niche market? All are possible. Unique isn't always good as it can be difficult to demonstrate an ROI when there aren't any existing cases studies and you are desperately trying to secure those first couple of reference sites.
If you think it all stacks up then take your list of challenges to others in the particular domain your solution targets. Get to trade shows or anything to get in front of people who understand the business you are targeting. It is unlikely that anyone will steal your idea (if it is truly unique it is much more likely they just wont get it!), but to be sure you don't need to give the details. All you need to do is clarify that the problems you think exist actually do and that its on people's agenda to fix them.
If others confirm there are problems to fix and you are still convinced your solution provides the answer then you need decide whether to take the plunge. I guess you are technical so that should lower the startup costs a bit, but developing software and taking it to market is obviously hugely expensive. One of the best ways is if you can develop it for someone on a paid basis and retain the IP so you can sell your solution to other organisations in the future. Many software startups grow out of these consultancy style engagements. Key thing again is to get verification from the market that you are heading in the right direction - don't heads down develop for 18 months without validating what you are doing!
Anyway, all that is a bit further down the line and I'd be happy to talk more about those things later if you wanted to. in the meantime, external verification of the perceived challenges is the first step.
Leon
First thing I would recommend is to list the benefits that your solution will bring to an organisation. Identify the problems it solves, things it does better, potential cost savings etc. Doesn't matter how cool the software is if it doesn't meet a genuine business need.
Then I would spend a long time on google searching for comparisons. If there aren't any potential competitors, think about why? Is it because noone has thought of it, is it because there isn't a need, is it because it is a newly emerging niche market? All are possible. Unique isn't always good as it can be difficult to demonstrate an ROI when there aren't any existing cases studies and you are desperately trying to secure those first couple of reference sites.
If you think it all stacks up then take your list of challenges to others in the particular domain your solution targets. Get to trade shows or anything to get in front of people who understand the business you are targeting. It is unlikely that anyone will steal your idea (if it is truly unique it is much more likely they just wont get it!), but to be sure you don't need to give the details. All you need to do is clarify that the problems you think exist actually do and that its on people's agenda to fix them.
If others confirm there are problems to fix and you are still convinced your solution provides the answer then you need decide whether to take the plunge. I guess you are technical so that should lower the startup costs a bit, but developing software and taking it to market is obviously hugely expensive. One of the best ways is if you can develop it for someone on a paid basis and retain the IP so you can sell your solution to other organisations in the future. Many software startups grow out of these consultancy style engagements. Key thing again is to get verification from the market that you are heading in the right direction - don't heads down develop for 18 months without validating what you are doing!
Anyway, all that is a bit further down the line and I'd be happy to talk more about those things later if you wanted to. in the meantime, external verification of the perceived challenges is the first step.
Leon
Upvote
0
I take your point, however If you where going to IBM you need a specialist and watertight agreement, off the shelf NDA just wont hack it when it comes to software. NDAs of this type will cost to setup, thats if you can get IBM to even talk with you. Investors is software are very rare - thats for a reason
Due to complexities and un-quantifiable approach of software designers - patent is my recommendation, and I will stick with it.
If the idea is as good as you think, spend the money, and make the investment.
Regards
Stu
Upvote
0
It is free to apply for grant of a patent.
proccessing is £200 ,you been wasting your money if you been paying thousands.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/patent/p-applying/p-costtime.htm
Earl
Upvote
0
No, sorry. Life isn't that simple.
First off, despite the previous posts, patenting ideas is impossible - it must be an invention.
Secondly patenting software outside the USA is a waste of time and money; the best you can hope for is copyright which means you need to write it and protect it.
If you are serious, you will blag cash from friends and family and develop the software to the point that you have something that can be sold or licensed. This will take time and effort and will normally fail but will occasionally make your fortune.
On balance, I recommend you complete your course whilst working on making the software.
Upvote
0
a bit more on how patent application request keeps you covered for 1 year for free.
You can also send your request for search and fee sheet with your application. If you decide not to do this now we will inform you of the date by which you must send them to ensure your application continues. This will be no later than 12 months from your filing date.
Earl
You can also send your request for search and fee sheet with your application. If you decide not to do this now we will inform you of the date by which you must send them to ensure your application continues. This will be no later than 12 months from your filing date.
Earl
Upvote
0
Ever tried it in the Uk without a multi-million $ legal budget behind you? The US has very different ideas about patent than the UK. So Amazon was able to patent 'one click billing' which is a joke in Europe. Even so, most software 'patents' can be worked around without too much effort. It's a complete waste of time and money - as BT found when they tried to prove that they had patented the internet when it invented Prestel.
(I know 'cos I was there.)
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/policy/policy-issues/policy-issues-patents/policy-issues-patents-computer.htm
Upvote
0
I wonder if Larry Page of the now great Google!! was given the same advice. He has never finished that course - I wonder why?
I take your point of the enforcement of patents in Europe, it is valid - but enforcing or creating value through innovation then selling on - it is possible to make serious money with the right idea.
Stuart
Upvote
0
I would have loved to be alive and involved in that Victorian age of invention and pre-Victorian age of enlightenment; must have been amazing if you were one of the few that knew.
Upvote
0
Have to agree a truely great age of discovery and inventions,
the public must have been astounded by the inventions that were put before them.
I had a R & D machine shop in the 60's.Must say I enjoyed the work every day.But finacially not so good so left for the crock of gold.
But always consider myself an engineer before all else.
Earl
Upvote
0
I'm sure he was and probably Bill Gates too. And on both ocasions the advice would have been correct. Although the world would have taken a different shape had they taken any notice.
What evidence do you have that might support a view that our OP is amongst this exhaulted company?
Do you think either Larry or Bill sought advice from the kind of near-do-wells that spend their time on a Uk business forum or do you think they jfdi?
Despite all that, the OP can't patent his idea, so what should he do next?
imo, he should write the software and copyright it. Then consider what he has. My experience in this is that he will have nothing unless he can make a business of it.
Meanwhile get on with his life - ideas on their own are utterly worthless.
Upvote
0
It depends if your glass is half empty or half full, whether your optimistic or a pessimist.
I disagree - It can be patented, and i quote you the recent case law for the UK court In the case Symbian's application GB 0325145 -
The Court of Appeal in UK has allowed a software patent, setting an important legal precedent.
In Mid October, the decision by the Court of Appeal has upheld a previous decision by the High Court that the Intellectual Property Office or IPO's refusal of a patent application by Symbian was not correct in law. The application was for a patent for an indexing system for library functions in an operating system. Accordingly, in considering the "technical effect" of the invention by smartphone OS vendor Symbian, the patent examiner had displayed an excessively "narrow" point of view. The Court of Appeal, under the leadership of Lord Justice Sir Robin Jacob, has thus wished to minimise somewhat the differences due to the so-called "absurd" discrepancies between the IPO and the EPO the European Patent Office (EPO).
The Court also wants to harmonise patenting practice in England and Wales with that on the Continent.
He could also follow your route and Copyright it, and try to enforce any infringement through the Civil courts, cant see this happening though.
Patent law on software is an ever changing cycle.
[FONT="]
[/FONT]
Upvote
0
Unless the idea is truly unique and posses a solid simple technique to produce a technical outcome that's not a business process. then you can go the Patent route.
But if the idea is just a rehash of some thing else then you can copyright.
Ethier way you need to design the software and prove it. so just an idea is useless.
you need detailed schematic of how it works technically for a patent and you need all of the complete code for a copyright.
At the end of this all if you either patented it or copyrighted it it needs to have a market to sell it.
And the idea also needs to be totally viable technically as well so that other people can't just do it in another way rending you software useless (Which is very easy with software. there 100 way to get the same result in code from a copyright point of view and the same amount of algorithms to get the same result from a patent point of view)
if you look at the browser embedded content lawsuits against Microsoft and other browser companies not allowing flash objects to be embed and interactive immediately once the browser has loaded.
You may have seen this when you have to click on the flash content to interact with it. well most web designers get around this patent by embedding the content with javascript. So that company in the end has made no money out of the patent and spent millions in the courts in the us.
Most successful software companies are so not throught patenst but from bing the first to do something and geting users using it. Google didnt have any patents at first they just design the software and got poeple using it.
Most software patents are from established companies just trying to protect them selves because that's what corporate giants do day in and day out with the vast amounts of capital they have.
I'm working on some PHP business software myself deployed via the Internet. I am also licensing part of it from another company which owns the copyright for some software, some thing a team of developers have been working on for five years. I obviously don't have that man power and money to do that so i have to use parts of there software and build ontop of it. I'm paying them a licensing fee depending on the amount of users using the software. maybe in a few years when my service is very successful i can employ my own team to rewrite all the software and bring all code in house and not pay any licensing, but it will help me now. I intended to just finish developing the rest of it myself and launch the service.
forget trying to protect the actual software concentrate more on the marketing side of it as in brand name. Get a good catchy sort domain name and trade mark the name of the software / service.
This is more important. if google had called it self - :
thereallygoodsearchengine.com
nobody would have heard of them and it would not have captured the imagination of the users using the service.
Every successful software product is so because of marketing not because of how good or unique it is. Just look at Mirosoft - Windows
Anyway good luck with your venture i hope you get your software product up and running and making money. I intend to get mine trading in the next 6 - 9 months.
But if the idea is just a rehash of some thing else then you can copyright.
Ethier way you need to design the software and prove it. so just an idea is useless.
you need detailed schematic of how it works technically for a patent and you need all of the complete code for a copyright.
At the end of this all if you either patented it or copyrighted it it needs to have a market to sell it.
And the idea also needs to be totally viable technically as well so that other people can't just do it in another way rending you software useless (Which is very easy with software. there 100 way to get the same result in code from a copyright point of view and the same amount of algorithms to get the same result from a patent point of view)
if you look at the browser embedded content lawsuits against Microsoft and other browser companies not allowing flash objects to be embed and interactive immediately once the browser has loaded.
You may have seen this when you have to click on the flash content to interact with it. well most web designers get around this patent by embedding the content with javascript. So that company in the end has made no money out of the patent and spent millions in the courts in the us.
Most successful software companies are so not throught patenst but from bing the first to do something and geting users using it. Google didnt have any patents at first they just design the software and got poeple using it.
Most software patents are from established companies just trying to protect them selves because that's what corporate giants do day in and day out with the vast amounts of capital they have.
I'm working on some PHP business software myself deployed via the Internet. I am also licensing part of it from another company which owns the copyright for some software, some thing a team of developers have been working on for five years. I obviously don't have that man power and money to do that so i have to use parts of there software and build ontop of it. I'm paying them a licensing fee depending on the amount of users using the software. maybe in a few years when my service is very successful i can employ my own team to rewrite all the software and bring all code in house and not pay any licensing, but it will help me now. I intended to just finish developing the rest of it myself and launch the service.
forget trying to protect the actual software concentrate more on the marketing side of it as in brand name. Get a good catchy sort domain name and trade mark the name of the software / service.
This is more important. if google had called it self - :
thereallygoodsearchengine.com
nobody would have heard of them and it would not have captured the imagination of the users using the service.
Every successful software product is so because of marketing not because of how good or unique it is. Just look at Mirosoft - Windows
Anyway good luck with your venture i hope you get your software product up and running and making money. I intend to get mine trading in the next 6 - 9 months.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Our OP does not have the legal resource of google or Symbian - he's a student with no money at all; it's not about optimism or pessimism it's about being realistic.
Realistically, if the idea can be turned into working software and/or a business, then there is some hope of protection otherwise nothing can be done about it.
Realistically, if the idea can be turned into working software and/or a business, then there is some hope of protection otherwise nothing can be done about it.
Upvote
0
You dont need the legal resource as the precedent is set. Forget trying to tell me software cant be patented because it can, and it can be used legally to protect your intellectual property or sell on and make money.
I assumed that before asking for funding the Op already knows money can be made from his idea - my advice was given from that stand point, and I was thinking rather more than a C++ program knocked up in a day.
I see people being knocked down and told to be realistic all the time - its the people who follow the dream and take the right advice with a sprinkle of luck that make the real money - Talk to any successful business man.
Im not on the forum to sell something Im here to help - its up for the OP to decide what advice he takes
Keep offering your realistic advice, and I will offer mine
Upvote
0
Latest Articles
-
The Most Dangerous Moment in Business Is When Everything Is Going WellThey Saw It Coming. They Did Nothing. The Lessons Every Business Owner...- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
AI and Your Business: Useful Tool, Not a Magic WandThere is no shortage of noise around artificial intelligence right now...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
Companies House WebFiling security incident: what happened, what to check, and what to do nextCompanies House has confirmed that its WebFiling service suffered a...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
Spring Budget 2026: A Quiet Update for UK BusinessesChancellor Rachel Reeves delivered the UK’s Spring Statement on 3 March...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
Practical Ways to Make Your Small Business More Resilient (Especially When the Unexpected Happens)Running a business means juggling plenty of things you can plan for and...- UKBF Editor
- Updated:
