I got a story pitch from an inventor today.
Or at least I thought it was a story pitch. The inventor never came out and requested a story. He never sold me on the idea or why I should care to write about it.
He was evidently very proud of his invention, as well as the patent attorney who represented him. He was earnest and passionate. I admire these qualities.
But he didn’t sell me on his story. Instead, he directed me to a Web site that doesn’t yet exist and encouraged me to read his patent. “All the material must be read for a comprehensive understanding,” he wrote me.
Here’s what the abstract says:
“An interactive menu apparatus and method within a software computer video display system for creating inventions or prospects for inventions, via the juxtaposition of concepts or words, defined from word paths or sets displayed on the menu, from one to six simulated spun reels or drums below the menu, seen through one to thirty open spaces, cells or windows on the menu.”
In other words, it’s a Web site that helps you create virtual prototypes.
We learn more from our mistakes than from our successes, or so the saying goes. And if that is the case, then I learn a lot every day.
So, here’s what I learned from this pitch:
- Patent abstracts generally don’t make great PR pitches.
- Subject headings are important. His subject head was: “innovation the way to bring that about to deal with the crisis.” This one is too long, unclear and grammatically incorrect. It also doesn’t follow our guidelines – we prefer you put “Article query” in the subject line.
- Don’t carbon copy a half-dozen other folks with your pitch. Many publications – including this one – do not accept multiple submissions.
