So, with regards to drawings? When do you need them? Do you need engineering done? How important is it to have a sample of your product made before you…
MARKS: To what extent? To get a patent or to get it commercialized? If you’re talking specifically about patents, you need patent drawings. You need a written disclosure. You don’t need a physical model. You can get a patent issued pretty easily, relatively speaking, just with doing research on the Internet and doing all that. The steps you would take if you have an idea that you think has longevity and it’s something worth investing in that you expect to be deriving income from for say, five years out, then it is probably worth at least filing a provisional patent. A provisional patent — they used to have what was called a disclosure document program, but it no longer exists. So now you do a provisional patent, which involves, basically, writing a very comprehensive description of your invention with as many features as — you know, all the features you can imagine. You can file that. That is not a formal patent, but what it does is it establishes a true description of your invention and on the basis of that document that you filed; you can turn it into a real patent within a year. That’s required to be to be filed within a year. But once you have that provisional patent filed, you do have a meaningful degree of protection in the marketplace to go out and talk to people. You can say it’s patent pending. The down side of doing that at the early stage of your idea is that what you’re probably thinking your important patentable features are turn out to be something entirely different. If you just have an idea now, and you try to write a patent on it, you have to reduce it to — you have to do the model of it. You need a prototype. You’re making a bunch of assumptions as to how this thing’s actually going to work in practice.

Because, actually, without a prototype, you don’t really know what your invention is.

So patenting early, without having a sample of your product, or prototype of your product, may not be a good idea?
MARKS: I don’t think so. Again, it depends on what you’re — you might end up filing a number of patents, plus all the provisional patents. But, again, it’s the question of resources, right? You can write a provisional patent to give yourself some protection as you’re talking to people, and then when you build the prototype you might write another one. So basically we tend to keep the thing quiet. You don’t talk to too many people about it. You make the prototype. You test it. You see if it’s something that works pretty much as you thought. Take a look at what you’ve got. Take a look at what’s out in the market place. You look at other patents that have been issued, other products. On the basis of all the information that you have, the prototype, the competitive products, issued patents, patent pendings that you’re aware of, then you write your disclosure. Then you write the provisional patent. Should an engineer be involved? The answer would be yes.

So filing a patent, and as you’ve mentioned, provisional patents and having drawings and engineering — at what point do you make a sample, a prototype?
MARKS: As early as you can. I would make a prototype prior to filing a patent. Because, actually, without a prototype, you don’t really know what your invention is. If we want to make this so that we can make it inexpensively, cheaply and reliably if you want to go for it, you have to make a number of prototypes. Without the prototypes, you can just make a bunch of assumptions but you don’t know if they’re going to be true. And the danger here is if you end up patenting every notion that goes into your head, so you have some simple product, but you might end up with 15 patents on this thing before you get to the patent that’s really worth having.

I want to talk to you about your background and how that may contribute to what you’re doing. If my information is correct, you were a commercial photographer and a photojournalist in New York and did work for American Express, Nikon, and Newsweek before you launched into this business?
MARKS: Yes.

Do you find that your background is advantageous in what you’re doing now, and how, if you do?
MARKS: Well, this photo background I have has been useful in that I can take my own pictures inexpensively. So at that level, the real superficial level, it’s been helpful that way. Much more helpful has been the experience I had to become a successful commercial photographer which involved being a hustler, basically being an entrepreneur. That experience of going out there and hustling and banging down doors, making cold calls, going out and getting business, putting together deals, that is the most helpful thing, that business experience.

Photographers sometimes see a shot; see particular details of a shot, which makes it a great shot. And it’s somewhat of a science to take a great photograph incorporating various aspects of light and balance. Does that come into play at all with… ?
MARKS: Oh yeah. I would actually characterize — what photography is is very different. When you become very proficient as a photographer, it’s like manufacturing a product. I can help you. I can use the light this way. And these are the basic rules I have that I use for composition. And you can go into any situation and apply this basic set of rules that you operate by. And you can pose pictures and light pictures and position people and do these things according to the set of rules you have. So in any photographic situation you enter, you have this set of rules that you’re applying to the situation. And your photographs come out looking — you know, in a controlled manner, you can produce great pictures. They’re a solid B plus every time because you’ve got a set of rules you applied to the situation, like a manufacturing process.

I want to ask you about the current litigation over a stapler product. This is public knowledge I believe.
MARKS: We designed a staple gun and licensed it to Black & Decker. Our staple gun utilized a unique “forward action” handle and became the PowerShot. When we did the licensing deal with Black & Decker, we reserved the right to use anything on our staple gun for any desktop stapler. That enabled the PaperPro line of desktop staplers manufactured by a company called Accentra. Accentra, when it first started out, made a deal with Staples, the office supply retailer, to supply private label staplers to Staples as the Staples brand. That deal went well for a number of years and then, Staples made the decision to knock off our spring-powered stapler. The result is that now we are engaged in patent litigation with them. We’re asserting they are violating numerous patents of ours.