Software Patents – Innovation is Usually in the Details

 

The importance of detail in software patent applications (and practically speaking, other categories) cannot be understated. The video discusses some issues around detail in a patent application.

Computer Matchmaking started in the 1960s. Match, Zoosk, and umpteen others have added to the field since then. Expanding upon the insufficiently detailed “dating app” example in the video, the start of a more detailed seed of disclosure for a theoretical patent application would be a dating app with an algorithm that minimizes “catfishing” risk and similar scams by sampling polling the GPS, logging IP addresses, and accessing known Wifi/Bluetooth/NFC beacons. The IP addresses are geolocated and the locations of the beacons are retrieved. The locations from the three sources are compared with the location listed on that dating file. When that person contacts another person, a location probability score is generated, with a high score being that all location sampling input is available and matches each other over time, that location sampling input matches the location on the dating profile, and that location sampling input matches the location on contacted person’s dating profile.

The article discussed in the video: Patent Eligibility: Get Technical or Get Denied

Some takeaways

  • Make an effort to describe the meaningful inventive aspects, that is to say what you have done that other innovators have not. It’s highly unlikely that a patent will be granted for just a “broad idea.”
  • Stating that an “algorithm” is performed is rarely helpful. Disclosing the steps in the algorithm, the inputs, the processing, and the output for each steps is more meaningful disclosure.
  • There are a lot of innovative people in the world. A patent application for just “a dating app,” “a social media app,” or a “security app” is fraught with higher risk and higher cost.

 

This entry was posted in Patents and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.