How and when you should patent your invention

• Published date: 05 October 2021
• Author: KFIR LUZZATTO
• Publication title: Jerusalem Post, The: Web Edition Articles (Israel)

Entrepreneurs at all levels sometimes operate under the misconception that to safeguard their intellectual property (IP), it is sufficient to state a desired goal, describe it in general terms and file a patent application to beat the competition at obtaining a so-called "priority date." Unfortunately, that is typically far from sufficient and, in many cases, is a self-defeating practice. Too often, patent applications submitted prematurely based on insufficient practical knowledge come back to haunt their owners.

There is a sharp difference between dreamers and inventors, which may be hard to appreciate because seeing the dividing line between the two requires a combination of legal and technical expertise. Once this difference is recognized, entrepreneurs can act better in tune with their needs. Thus, it is worthwhile taking a good look at the gap between the two.

A simple example that illustrates the point is the invention of the submarine (which was not made by Jules Verne, contrary to common belief). In 1578, the British mathematician William Bourne described the idea of a submarine in a book. However, his submarine would not have been eligible for a patent because he only described a general idea. Bourne was a dreamer.

42 years later, Dutch inventor Cornelis Drebbel built the first navigable submarine, which dove under the Thames River in 1620. Drebbel was an inventor. He possessed all the technical information needed to turn Bourne's dream into an actual working device.

Unfortunately, life nowadays is more complex and full of pitfalls than it was in the 1600s. The modern dreamer is not clueless like Bourne was; he has practical knowledge and can include actual technical details in the "description of his dream" (which often takes the form of a provisional or other patent application). However, it so happens that what we often see in patent applications of this kind can be described as both "too little and too much."

"Too little" means that the technical details described in the patent application do not satisfy the basic requirement of the sufficient description needed for a valid patent to be granted...