Quick, Patent It
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
However, if you do wish to proceed the best play to start would be with the official Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP):
I guess the takeaway for new entrepreneurs is to focus on making money, not patents. Because once you have money, you can hire good people, and then you'll own the patents that they produce. It's kinda odd that giant corporations own huge patent portfolios, but almost never the patents on the inventions that spawned the companies. I guess it makes sense when you consider employment law and the need to earn a living, though. If it works for Google, E-bay, Akamai, etc, it ought to be good enough for us.
In light of this article and the fact that we are on the topic of patents, it would be priceless for someone to give us a rundown of what the process really looks like, resources on writing it as best you can to possibly lessen the impact of the cost of hiring someone, and knowing how much is reasonable when hiring someone.
That may be asking for a lot, and that information may be invaluable to the holder in such a competitive market, but that is precisely why those scams (which finally got busted) years ago flourished (you may remember the commercials on t.v. for patenting your idea).
That's the last I will comment on it, but I do thank you for basically saying that no matter how you do it, hiring someone is not an option if you want it to be defensible.
It would seem immediately apparent to most 2 handed children. I do find it interesting that the patent missed out on the method of elevating one's ass by pressing outward on both chains. Now that's technology.
Patents are already granted for software and if software is not the description of processes, I don't know what it is. So why say it "would open the door"?...