Free educational resource for founders

The Patent Decision Lab

The decisions behind a patent application deserve more than a checklist. Follow a fictional startup through six of them: what evidence matters, which options exist, what remains uncertain, and when a decision should be revisited.

An evidence-informed process with documented technical and strategic reasoning.

Explore a decision →

Choose a decision to explore

The fictional example

FrameCheck is a made-up, 12-person startup building software that detects altered and AI-generated video. It is preparing for a seed round, plans a conference demo in ten weeks, and competes with much larger platforms. Any resemblance to a real company is coincidental.

The examples are adapted from a broader evidence-review methodology. They do not evaluate your invention or ask you to disclose confidential technical details.

Decision question

Is the problem widespread, and what exactly is the technical contribution?

Evidence worth gathering

  • Document the technical limitation without claiming ownership of the problem itself.
  • Identify credible publications or examples showing how the problem arises.
  • Distinguish technical observations from market-size assumptions.

How FrameCheck approaches it

FrameCheck's founders first describe the problem as "deepfakes are everywhere." The evidence supports something narrower and more useful: existing detectors lose accuracy after social platforms recompress a video, shown in two public benchmark papers and the team's own test logs. That narrower technical problem is what an application can describe in depth.

Options considered

  • Center the application on the recompression problem and FrameCheck's solution to it.
  • Describe detection more generally, with recompression as one embodiment.
  • Keep some implementation details as trade secrets.

Why it matters

A commercially significant problem can justify further investigation, but claim scope must be supported by the inventive technical disclosure and legal requirements.

What remains uncertain

Existing prior art, competing solutions, and actual technical distinctions.

When to revisit

When new benchmark results or competing approaches are published.

Read more: From Technical Disclosure to Patent Application: The Decisions That Matter · What Makes a Patent Valuable, and Why Detectability Matters

From a decision to a usable record

What happens to the reasoning?

A patent file shows what was submitted, but it may not explain every alternative considered or why a filing path was chosen. For material decisions, a short internal record can preserve that context for future drafting, prosecution, or an attorney handoff. The example below is fictional and deliberately simplified, not an actual client record.

FrameCheck · fictional decision example

File before the demonstration

Decision
Complete the identified disclosure additions, then file before the planned conference demo.
Evidence
Draft specification review, the conference date, and what the demo will show.
Why
The demo is a public disclosure. Filing first protects what the application describes, and taking two weeks to finish the identified additions costs less than leaving that material to a later filing date.
Alternative
File the current draft immediately or postpone the demo.
Still uncertain
Whether subsequent testing will produce additional inventions needing later filings.
Revisit when
The demo date or specification changes, or testing reveals new technical subject matter.

This is an educational illustration. Actual internal matter records may contain confidential attorney analysis and are not public worksheets. Read why preserving the reasoning matters →

Free founder worksheet

Prepare an evidence record before your first patent meeting

A printable worksheet that walks through the same questions FrameCheck answered. For each one, it gives you space to record the source, its date, whether the point is verified or assumed, and what is still open. It is designed for general preparation and does not ask for confidential invention details.

Open the printable worksheet →

Invention Strategy & Evidence Worksheet

What it covers:

  1. The technical problem
  2. Public evidence that the problem exists
  3. Alternatives and known approaches
  4. Disclosures, launches, and collaborations
  5. What is verified, and what is assumed
  6. Commercial goals and budget
  7. Questions for your patent attorney or agent

Want a practitioner to help evaluate your invention?

PatentDrafters supports founders and technology teams with technical patent application preparation. An initial consultation covers goals, timing and fit.

Book a no-charge consultation

Do not share confidential invention details before conflicts and an engagement have been addressed.

Illustrative educational content only, using a fictional company. Not a patentability, infringement or valuation opinion; not legal advice; no attorney-client relationship is created.