Be first, be fast, & stay ahead of the competition

Preoccupations elsewhere have rather stalled my efforts on behalf of RE:tie, but I do maintain an ongoing interest in matters IP.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21510198

I know Trevor (if not well enough to call him that probably) a bit, and it's hard not to get caught up with his infectious enthusiasm for 'inventing.

It's also not hard to detect a certain frustration with the words vs. deeds of most of 'them' involved in the IP process... who would not exist but for the 'us' that actually create new ideas out of thin air.

On this new initiative I can only welcome what may make things easier, quicker and one hopes cheaper.

However I stumble here: 

'Under the old system patents had to be registered separately in every country, which made the process cumbersome and substantially more expensive than in the United States.'

My experience with the UK, EU and almost all other systems was pretty painless. It was only when the USPTO got their protectionist mitts on it all that the pear was crafted.

"Mr Baylis said a universal patent system should be introduced and intellectual property theft should be a criminal offence".

I might add a few more caveats to that.

For now I would be hard pressed to go near IP again, preferring to keep my money and invest it in the priorities in my title.

IP...oh

Time to reinvigorate this blog with a post.

Today I was intrigued by this tweet from the IPO:
---

IPO.GOV.UK ‏@The_IPO

#dragonsden is taking a break and will return on 11/11. Come back then to read our blog mentioning all IP on programme http://www.ipo.gov.uk/dd2012.htm

---

In part, because while it is many things, I would not err on calling the programme 'all about everyday inventors, designers, creators or entrepreneurs pitching their innovative business ideas to a panel of successful investors'.

Entertaining, yes, but also a ruthlessly controlled TV programme dedicated more to making going TV than anything else. And while the guys pitching may seem 'everyday', they are also carefully selected, and not always for the awesomeness of the idea as much as how the Dragon's can savage it. Equally, I'd be hard pressed to equate the investors and their mindsets with most I have met... or would want to.

Actually this programme has already crossed my radar, and on matters IP, through what I had feared (unfounded) was a direct competitor garnering vast support and publicity: the Rapstrap. As it turns out, though similar in many ways (cable tie, eco, etc), it was actually a vastly different concept/product. In fact it was in many ways a great complement, so I wished them well. Their success could only help RE:tie.

Then I read this: http://ipkitten.blogspot.co.uk/2009/03/rapstrap.html

Hmn.

I'll leave what I though then (and no correction/update I can find since bar this or this from 3 years ago) to a comment below the factual blurb:

'What I find interesting here is that two so called sophisticated investors were prepared to invest in a product based business without any significant due diligence on the IP front. Also a company was prepared to place an order of £36 million in ignorance!!'

By most measures, how is it possible for the country's 'top' ideas investment programme to get a brilliant idea as far as they did... only to discover there were huge potential problems on the due diligence around IP?

And how is the UK's IPO pushing a programme where such things seem, at best, an afterthought? Even if the UK aspect is resolved, the UK IPO does seem more tolerant of crossover similarities, if heading to the US market, given my experience I wish them luck.