The Petrifying Patent Peril of Public Disclosure

I’m hammering home a petrifying patent pitfall that often hits inventors hard: the 12-month on-sale bar. Let’s look to the sad tale of inventor Lawrence Pfaff and his failed patent for an electronic socket. He missed his application deadline by just 11 days after the first day he offered his invention for sale. Waiting for 12 months and 11 days after that initial on-sale date destroyed his ability to obtain any patent rights.

In the US, you have a one-year grace period from the date of your first public disclosure (selling, offering to sell, or publishing) to file your patent application. Missing that deadline means your potential patent rights become ghostly. You won’t be able to receive a patent, and that means you won’t be able to stop others from making or selling it.

Filing before public disclosure is the silver bullet to protect your invention. Using non-disclosure agreements, or NDAs, can help you keep your invention private until you’re ready to make it public and have legal remedies if anyone who signed it violates the terms.

Intellectual property is one of the most terrifyingly useful tools you have. If you’re a creator or other entrepreneur ready to build a frighteningly powerful brand and business, you need to know how to use it. You don’t have to face the darkness alone, though.

I help entrepreneurs across the U.S. make smart, legally sound decisions about their intellectual property. I’m an attorney in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois, but I serve intellectual property clients nationwide.

If you’d like to consult with me, please book a consultation online at kingpatentlaw.com or by calling my office at 312-596-2222 or 217-714-8558.

Please check out the other posts and pages on my website for more information on intellectual property and business law issues. I’m also on most major podcast platforms as “Know Your Rights: Your Intellectual Property and Business Law Playbook” (video on YouTube, Spotify, and Substack only) and on most social media as @kingpatentlaw.

Picture of Julie King

Julie King

Julie is a licensed patent attorney and the founding attorney at King Patent Law, PLLC, with over 25 years of legal experience. Her practice focuses on intellectual property, business, and estate planning, and she's passionate about helping clients use IP tools to protect and grow their businesses. When she's not helping clients, you can find her at a live rock show, watching a horror movie, or playing the guitar (badly).
.libutton { display: flex; flex-direction: column; justify-content: center; padding: 7px; text-align: center; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important; color: #ffffff !important; width: 14rem; height: 2.5rem; border-radius: 16px; background-color: #0A66C2; font-family: "SF Pro Text", Helvetica, sans-serif; } Follow Julie on LinkedIn

This content is for informational and educational purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice about your specific situation, consult with a licensed attorney.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

More Posts

Categories

Recent Posts

Applications Decoded

Tales from the Crypt(ic Requirements): Trademark Specimens and Intent-to-Use Trademark Applications Decoded

Thinking about filing a trademark before you launch? Intent-to-Use applications and specimen requirements are more complex than they appear. Patent attorney Julie King explains what goes wrong and why trademark attorney guidance matters. You’ve got a great brand name. Maybe you’ve designed a logo. You’re getting ready to launch your business or product. But here’s the question everyone asks: Should you wait until you’re actually selling products to file for a trademark? Or can you file now and secure your rights before launch?

Trump trademarks and the Domestic Emoluments Clause

Current Events: Trump Trademarks and the Domestic Emoluments Clause

How Trump Business Ownership of Airport Trademarks Would Violate the Domestic Emoluments Clause: How does the Domestic Emoluments Clause apply to these trademark applications? Who names airports? That’s right, Congress does, for airports under federal jurisdiction, and the states do for state-owned airports.
Trump has asked for the Palm Beach International Airport and Dulles International Airport to be named after him. Given that these applications also cover airport construction, it’s not a leap to think there may be future airports Trump wants to be named “DONALD J. TRUMP INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT” and/or “PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT,” especially if the proposed renaming of the Palm Beach and Dulles airports doesn’t happen. Note that the trademarks for the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport are owned by the public entity that runs the airport, Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Federal Agency Assignee of United States (D.C. Body Politic and Corporate) ), NOT a private company.