Should I patent this, or am I too late?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mshilarious
  • Start date Start date
mshilarious

mshilarious

Banned
I don't play guitar live anymore, but I had a thought in the car today. Does anybody make a guitar that has a 2-way switch and a TRS cable that could be used to switch between amp channels? See, I always hated footswitches, this would be the equivalent right on the guitar.

I'd wire my guitar like that, except like I said I don't play live anymore, don't even have an amp . . .
 
An idea I guess, but if you are already tethered by a cord using the TRS thing, isn't it better to be able to switch with your feets without taking your hand away from the strings, or accidently hitting the switch with some over the top Pete Townsend style strumming at an inopportune moment?
 
To be quite honest......I don't think anyone would buy that.
 
from www.patentcafe.com
"in NO CASE should an inventor take on the nearly 2 years and high costs of pursuing a patent until they really understand how they will make money from it"

You're talking about $10,000 to get a design patent. That will feel like chump change if you need to defend the patent. If Gibson or Fender decides to use the design, the burden will be on you (and your team of attorneys) to prove that they are violating the patent.

Marketing and capacity to deliver are so much more important to an inventor than patents.

Sorry to be pessimistic. But if you do feel like pursuing this, spend some time on www.patentcafe.com
 
I think that's a kick ass idea if you could work out the 2 cord deal. Maybe go wireless.
 
Parker and Kaman music have both used such a design for different applications on their guitars.

H2H
 
Better yet make it so when you clap your hands it changes channels :D
 
Bootsy

I read an interview with Bootsy Collins once that said he has 4 outputs from his "Space Bass", routed to 4 different amp/cab setups. -Todd
 
fprod south said:
from www.patentcafe.com
"in NO CASE should an inventor take on the nearly 2 years and high costs of pursuing a patent until they really understand how they will make money from it"

Unless you just want a patent for the prestige of it.

You're talking about $10,000 to get a design patent.

You probably mean a "utility" patent. A "design" patent would be a lot cheaper, but almost useless for the proposed idea.

That will feel like chump change if you need to defend the patent. If Gibson or Fender decides to use the design, the burden will be on you (and your team of attorneys) to prove that they are violating the patent.

If they are clearly infringing the patent, I know of many attorneys who would gladly take on the case on commission alone. Possibly free to you if you lose, but they get a cut if you win.

Marketing and capacity to deliver are so much more important to an inventor than patents.

Yes!

Sorry to be pessimistic. But if you do feel like pursuing this, spend some time on www.patentcafe.com

Sounds like it might be good reading for a novice inventor.
 
Dude... thats kickin!

That's a wicked idea, im gonna do that to my guitars now.

You could easily do that, but you'd need a 4 conductor cord (such as S-Video) if you only need one switch.

I, however, would need 5 conductors to control my Real Tube.... thanks for the idea though. I'll figure something out!

Mike
[white_devil]
 
Hey, thanks for the replies. I didn't seriously mean to patent it (I happen to work for a large law firm with a big IP practice though), just wanted to throw it out for public consumption.

Regarding wireless, does anybody make a stereo wireless box? I dunno, but if they do, then there you go. You'd also need an amp with separate channel inputs or 2 DI or something.

I don't think you'd need 4 conductors, since both channels can share a ground. Dunno how that would work with wireless though. A ham radio friend of mine explained how an antenna creates a ground loop, but I didn't understand (obviously). It made my head hurt. I got a D in physics.
 
Back
Top