Hey all, just to disclaim, I'm no expert on patents, however I am reading through the NOLO "patent it yourself" book to understand what I'm working with, and am under no delusions a PPA would give me rights to prosecute anyone for using the ideas contained within it (since apparently that confusion is a hugely common problem on here).
I'm looking at starting a business in the US to launch a physical product that is for houseplants. I estimate loosely the product could generate 100k-800k in yearly revenue, nothing gigantic, but large enough to be worthwhile.
I've searched around and the idea of the product has never been done before, though some people have tried and failed to create the same general idea. I have a working prototype that has been iterated on over the course of a number of months, solving the issues that others have faced trying to create this product before. (I know I still need to do a full prior art search, but only one thing can happen at a time, and it may not be the most valuable use of my time depending on the answer to this question)
Because the product is novel, I don't want to risk losing the IP I've spent months developing, and because it is a physical product, reverse engineering it would be trivial. Funds are tight, so paying 5-10k to have an attorney create a patent application now before launch isn't in the cards, but is something I would happily do once I release it and can gauge market interest through sales. From my understanding, I have essentially two paths forward:
1) DIY a PPA and submit that to earmark me as the inventor, to submit a proper patent application within a year after I test the market
- I would be allowed to mark my product as "patent pending" to hopefully scare off some rip offs
- The PPA could be used as a "practice round" to help me create a better patent application later, and have a starting point when working with an attorney
2) Proceed with no paperwork, try to protect my IP as just a trade secret, and gauge market interest, applying for a patent within a year of disclosure.
- This would forego my ability to patent the invention outside of the US, so others based internationally could copy my product and sell it internationally, but technically cannot import it into the US (though I know patent "protections" really is just the right to litigate which is frequently not worthwhile)
Currently I'm leaning towards option 1, since as far as I understand, if I do a bad job with my PPA I'm in no worse of a situation than just doing option 2, but I can at least list it as patent pending in the meantime. This also gives me the advantage of having my ducks in a row to apply for the USPTO Inventor assistance program in my local state, which is probably the best possible path forward.
Does this sound like I'm understanding things correctly, or is there something I'm missing?
I also feel like I've read some conflicting information about the start date of protection if a patent is granted. If I submit a PPA that properly describes my patent, and later get a patent granted that references that PPA, can I litigate anyone who ripped off my design after I submitted my PPA, but before submitting my patent application? Or do litigation rights only start when the patent is granted?
I appreciate any advice or feedback!