It`s amusing how huge companies like Apple and Samsung fight each other because of the design patents while small companies initiate trademark infringement procedures that can ruin them because usually such trials last for years. Creating a patent law treaty is a nice idea and hopefully this will help patent offices to be more efficient
Ok .. let me get it correctly .. one expects to be very talented very successful designer paid probably at least 3x over the said $42K, inventing highly sophisticated stuff for which you hope to get even more $$$ and all that would be validated by a law school student (well ... maybe an engineering one...) working after hours for the said highly motivating $42K ... Is it only me to see something worong with this picture?
Just to put it in perspective: I saw a postdoc paying for a room (literally: a room: ~ 10 ft x 14 ft) ~$1300 just because it was in Cambridge (Mass) close to the Kendall Square area. Mercifully the heating was included ...
Anybody lately checked the prices of academic textbooks?
Having seen the work of US patent examiners up close, I would think that for 42K$ I am not getting my moneys' worth. Most examiners can't find prior art which is used later in court to invalidate the patents they grant, thus rendering their work worthless.
Design patents are useful for keeping competitors from creating aftermarket spare parts or consumables. For example, if you have a design patent for a printer ink cartridge, which requires a specific shape to fit the printer, you are legally preventing me from selling third-party replacements.
I agree with Brutus about $42K. That is a very good entry level income, at least in this corner of Michigan. IN fact, I find the published salary surveys to be quite unbelievable in light of the engineering salaries I see in this part of the country. Perhaps in california things are different, since the cost of living is at least twice what it is in the rest of the civilized world.
1. The original purpose of design patents was to serve provide a defense against those would build a knock-off product and attempt to pass it off as one from the original manufacturer. E.g., products like fake Rolex watches or Luis Vuitton luggage, but without a manufacturer name, so trademark litigation isn't possible.
If you think about it. Apple's argument actually follows that line--their argument was that customers would see someone using an iPhone and walk into a store and see a Samsung phone and purchase it, believing it was an iPhone. They got witnesses (who knows where?) to testify to that. The argument here is not that design patents are bogus, but that the jury was biased.
2. There are many career patent examiners, but most of the junior patent examiners--the ones making $42K--take the job because of its 8 to 4 nature so they can attend law school at night at GMU or GWU. It's no different from any other grad student job. Your slur on quality is unsuportable and unjustified and reflects badly on your credibility.
There was once a time when getting a patent ment something. Today with our system many patents are issued that should never be issued. It seems that the patent office will issue a patent and let the courts figure it our. Kick the can down the road and let someone else fix the problem. When a product is marked with a patent number it should mean something.
The term was extended, almost universal acceptance of design patents issues abroad and allowing 100 items per patent were the major changes. The 100 hundred drops the amount the patent office receives per filing which is significant, especially since they will probably not get additional time allowance to review them - thus it will become a rubber stamp operation.
As for salary, I will recheck the latest figures for engineering pay scales, but I believe this is well below the median.
As we unveil EE Times’ 2015 Silicon 60 list, journalist & Silicon 60 researcher Peter Clarke hosts a conversation on startups in the electronics industry. Panelists Dan Armbrust (investment firm Silicon Catalyst), Andrew Kau (venture capital firm Walden International), and Stan Boland (successful serial entrepreneur, former CEO of Neul, Icera) join in the live debate.