not eligible for a patent.
This is a short-term strategy, but nonetheless one sometimes used
by applicant who want their competitors to think there is no point
gearing up for production.
There is nothing to stop you from doing this; the question becomes
one of how much you are willing to spend having the patent drafted.
Obviously there is no point spending lots of money - but is it worth
paying a significant amount to have an application that looks the
part?
A related strategy is to aim for a granted patent as usual but to
have it drafted cryptically, so as to make it harder for competitors to
evaluate the value and patentability of the subject matter. A patent
application must disclose the invention fully and clearly, however
the requirement of clarity is only that the patent can be understood -
not that it should be easy reading.
Additionally many applicants want vague and nondescript titles and
abstracts such as "a system", so that after the application is
published, it is harder for competitors to be aware that it exists.
Naturally some examiners may look down upon this practice - and
in some territories (such as the UK) the examiner can re-write the
abstract if he sees fit.
Nothing on this site constitutes legal advice, an offer, an offer to treat or a legal relationship.
Always check with your IP consultant.
