Where to start

>>1089807
File a patent

>>1089813
That's a negative, ghost rider. Possibly.

First OP, tell us what it does. No, don't tell us (or anyone else at this point) how it does that or what process it uses, but we need to know what it does.

Have you already researched similar patents? Only *after* doing that can you say that you're "90% sure it doesn't exist" because it's always possible that your thing is already patented, just using different words in the title and description.

>What can I do to make money from it?
Like I said, we need to know what it does to give you advice here. Is it an industrial machine? Is it a commercial process? Or is it just a consumer device?

>how and who do i pitch it to?
Gotta know what the hell we're dealing with. Developing an industrial machine is worlds apart from creating a consumer gizmo.

>if I want to start an LLC that produces and sells my invention, what is step one?
You google "how to start an LLC". It varies by state.

Side note, if you want to be successful, you really need to work on your typing, grammar, and sentence structure. Nobody's going to take you seriously if you speak with as much eloquence as an 8th grader.

>>1090083
>That's a negative, ghost rider. Possibly.
The reason "just getting a patent" is a negative is because patents are fucking expensive for anyone who isn't already raking in hundreds of thousands of dollars. Getting a patent done properly, that is, with a lawyer and (probably) an engineer to ensure that the drawings, specifications, and explanations all work is going to run somewhere between $15,000 to $35,000+.

Patents are typically only recommended if they can be reasonably expected to return the owner 10x the cost of filing.

It's hard to enforce patents, again, if you aren't already making hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Some things (WD40 is an example) are better held as trade secrets because patents expire after 20 years, plus the patent by definition reveals how your device works. If it's worded broadly enough, you'll be protected, but in all likelihood a patent will only open up your idea to being copied and slightly modified by an existing company.

>>1090083
basically its a special type of dry erase marker that is more efficient than the current structure found in current models. it sounds really dumb on here but if i could explain it in detail it would sound much more reasonable

>>1090159
give the design to a big company for free, they will help you out :)

>>1090159
More efficient as in it erases better? Interesting.

My first reaction is that I don't think the dry erase market is easy to break into, nor shake up. If I were you, I would focus on developing the product, advertising and selling it online, and pitching it to local office supply stores. My main issue with getting a patent is that they're extremely expensive and you have no idea yet whether or not this thing will sell. At all. You could dump $25,000 into a patent and then never see a dime in sales or licensing. On the other hand, if Sanford L.P. (owners of Sharpie, Expo, and a few other writing utensil brands) licenses your product in all their dry erasers, you could be taking home a couple percent of their probably millions or tens of millions of dollars in sales.

As with most things, it comes down to money. If you can toss 30 grand without a sweat into a venture that may earn you nothing, go ahead. Otherwise, your options are make the product yourself, sell it, and see if you can earn money, or do nothing.

On selling it yourself: you have 12 months from the time of first "public showcasing" to patent an invention. If you start making money selling it in that time frame, it may be worthwhile to sink the money into a patent. If you wait until after 12 months have lapsed since unveiling it, it's in the public domain and anyone can use it.

See if you can torrent a PDF of the book "Patent Ready" by Kavounas. It's pretty short and written in plain English. That'll give you a more complete understanding of the patent process.