I must credit the research behind this post to Keir Finlow Bates. Keir is an entrepreneur based out of Finland, where he runs a Blockchain research company. I recently came across his research report on the Blockchain patent market.

It was refreshing to see that the report was published on LinkedIn and free for everybody to access and benefit from. It had good coverage, understandable trends, a few obvious names at the top, and a few disappointing stats too. Keir had spent three days researching on Blockchain patent information on ‘google patents’ and compiled the statistics in his report.

Before we get into the findings of the report, I just wanted to discuss the question, “Do patents matter at all?”. I believe, the answer is “It depends”. It depends on your willingness to defend them – if you are the patent holder.

With 97% of all patents, the costs are not justified. The inventor spends the money filing the patent, but do not reap any benefits. 50% of patents are expire as inventors do not pay the maintenance fees. So why file a patent at all?

Patents make sense if your product is extremely complex and hard to develop, and if the costs of defending the patent is affordable/justified. It also helps with perception (that you own the product IP), and posturing (that you will defend it).

However, defending a patent takes years, and costs millions of dollars. So it may not necessarily be an option for a startup with a differentiated product and shallow pockets. It may also not make sense if the invention’s life span is relatively shorter. By the time the patent battle is fought in courts, the life of the product would be over.

Patents are often very narrowly defined, and getting around them shouldn’t necessarily be hard work for a smart competitor/imitator. In a conversation with a startup CEO I met recently, she revealed that she wasn’t so fond of patenting her product. She reasoned that she had to give away a lot of information about her product during the patenting exercise, that it makes it easier for a competitor to create a close enough version of it.

In the case of Blockchain, I feel, patents are a KPI to mark industry and thought leadership than protecting IP. Apart from a handful of architectural improvisation in Blockchain, innovation has been largely incremental.

Another point to ponder is that, Blockchain is a technology that knows no boundaries. As there are several Blockchain friendly island jurisdictions, patenting within major jurisdictions like the US, Europe or China may be meaningless. However, the race for getting on top of the patent list is still on.

Source: Keir’s report

Coming back to Keir’s analysis, one key dimension I missed on it was China. It’s no news to us that China is racing ahead of the rest of the world in patenting its inventions with most emerging technologies like AI, Blockchain and Quantum Computing.

A research on patent databases Patentics and Incopat about a year ago, identified that Alibaba was leading the Blockchain tally, even ahead of IBM. Of the top 36 companies with at least 20 Blockchain patents, about 50% of them were Chinese firms including BAT.

Keir’s analysis was performed on Google patent, which supposedly includes China Patents – but the data in the report indicates otherwise. The key takeaway from the reports are that,

- Bank of America leads the tally with 60 filed and 24 granted patents in the US.
- IBM had over 200 filings and 16 granted patents, and continue their investments in Blockchain R&D.
- Challenging the big names, Chainfrog really stole the thunder, with over 16 filed and 4 granted patents.
- Apple, Google and Goldman Sachs disappointed with 0, 1 and 2 granted patents to their names respectively. However, it may be a calm before the storm for these leading brands.

One key point stands out for me. Is the system of patenting fundamentally broken? If I spent two years of my life creating a complex product, addressing a huge market, I should be able to patent it, and defend my patent. Cost shouldn’t be a barrier to defend my work.

Instead of raising the innovation bar for competitors/imitators, the patenting system has perhaps raised the cost bar for inventors to defend their IP.

Arunkumar Krishnakumar is a VC investor focusing on Inclusion, a writer and a podcast host.
I have no positions or commercial relationships with the companies or people mentioned. I am not receiving compensation for this post.
dailyfintech.com

Lisez gratuitement le quotidien Finyear & sa newsletter quotidienne.
Recevez chaque matin par mail la newsletter Finyear, une sélection quotidienne des meilleures infos et expertises en finance digitale, corporate finance & crypto finance.

Read for free The daily newspaper Finyear & its daily newsletter.
Receive the Finyear's newsletter every morning by email, a daily snapshot of the best news and expertise in digital finance, corporate finance & crypto finance.

------------------------

Chaineum :
Fondée en 2015, Chaineum est un cabinet de conseil en opérations de haut de bilan offrant une expertise de premier plan en matière d’ICO et STO, avec une vision stratégique orientée tant vers le métier de ses clients que sur la technologie blockchain. A ce titre, Chaineum a participé à la mise en œuvre de bonnes pratiques dans le secteur (ICO Charter, Security Token Network).
La division services blockchain de Chaineum, développe la technologie Chaineum Segment, une blockchain privée orientée objets.

About Chaineum:
Founded in 2015, Chaineum is a leading corporate finance advisory firm with a strong expertise in ICO and STO, and a strategic focus on both its clients' business and blockchain technology. As such, Chaineum paved the way in the implementation of certain best practices in this sector (ICO Charter, Security Token Network).
Chaineum's blockchain services division, is developing Chaineum Segment technology, an object-oriented private blockchain.

-------------------------

No Offer, Solicitation, Investment Advice, or Recommendations

This website is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell, a solicitation to buy, or a recommendation for any security, nor does it constitute an offer to provide investment advisory or other services by FINYEAR.
No reference to any specific security constitutes a recommendation to buy, sell or hold that security or any other security.
Nothing on this website shall be considered a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security, future, option or other financial instrument or to offer or provide any investment advice or service to any person in any jurisdiction.
Nothing contained on the website constitutes investment advice or offers any opinion with respect to the suitability of any security, and the views expressed on this website should not be taken as advice to buy, sell or hold any security. In preparing the information contained in this website, we have not taken into account the investment needs, objectives and financial circumstances of any particular investor.
This information has no regard to the specific investment objectives, financial situation and particular needs of any specific recipient of this information and investments discussed may not be suitable for all investors.
Any views expressed on this website by us were prepared based upon the information available to us at the time such views were written. Changed or additional information could cause such views to change.
All information is subject to possible correction. Information may quickly become unreliable for various reasons, including changes in market conditions or economic circumstances.