Why Filing a Patent Just Got More Complicated For Startups (Opinion)The America Invents Act, which went into effect March 16, has changed the process for patenting. These developments might not help entrepreneurs after all. Here's why.

ByScott Shane

Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

NY Store

The major provisions of theAmerica Invents Act-- which made the most substantial changes to the U.S.patentsystem in the last 50 years -- came into effect on March 16, dramatically changing the U.S. system for protectingintellectual property.

The Obama administrationclaimsthe new law will benefit small businesses by speeding up the patent application process and improving patent quality. While some of the new law's provisions will undoubtedly help small business owners, I'm not sure the changes to the patent system will help entrepreneurs on balance.

For those of you with patentable technology, talking to an intellectual property attorney should be high on your to-do list. The Act has dramatically changed the patent system in ways that affect your intellectual property strategy.

Consider the following four provisions, which may negatively affect the patenting process for your small business:

Related:Obama Takes Aim at 'Patent Trolls'

1. First-to-file.Under the new law, patents go to the first inventor to file for them -- a big change from the old law, which awarded patents to the first inventor to come up with an idea, whether he or she got to the patent office first.

First-to-file makes it more difficult for entrepreneurs to delay applying for patents until after they've developed and assessed the commercial potential of a new technology, a common practice among high tech entrepreneurs. If inventors wait rather than file patents right away, they run the risk that someone else will come up with the same invention and apply for a patent first. The end result: Small business owners will need to shell out cash for patents before they know if their inventions stand a chance in the marketplace.

2. Patentability of trade secrets.根据旧的法律,专利和商业秘密mutually exclusive. If an inventor treated an invention as a trade secret -- keeping its commercially valuable information undisclosed -- for more than one year, it could no longer be patented, which would give the inventor a monopoly on the use of the invention granted by the government's patent office. Under the America Invents Act, a company can treat an invention as a trade secret for many years – think the formula for Coca-Cola here – then later patent it.

The patentability of trade secrets will work in favor of existing large companies who can combine trade secrets and patents to protect their intellectual property for long periods of time and against new, small companies, most of whom who don't have existing trade secrets.

Related:The Rising Threat of Patent Trolls and What You Can Do to Protect Your Startup

3. Post-grant opposition.This term refers a third party's right to challenge a patent's validity during the first nine months after it has been issued. Under the old law, there was no post-grant opposition. This provision, which the new law introduced to the U.S. patent system, will disadvantage small companies by making broad patents less likely. That's not good for new companies lacking other competitive advantages who are trying to raise money to challenge established competitors.

Moreover, it handicaps entrepreneurs from challenging existing companies. Evidence from Europe, which has had post-grant opposition for years, shows that large, established companies use this technique strategically to stop new companies, making post grant opposition the first of a series of legal challenges to their new competitors' intellectual property.

4. Fast tracking for a fee.The new law allows companies to "fast track" a patent application, getting it processed in one year for an extra fee of $4,800 or $2,400 for businesses with fewer than 500 employees. That timeframe is much shorter than the more than three years it currently takes to process the average patent application.

While getting patents approved faster is a good thing, the fast-track approach favors those who can afford to pay the higher fees. Most observers believe big, established companies, not small start-ups, are the ones who are going to get their patents approved more quickly because they can afford the fast-track fees.

Related:Quirky and GE Team Up to Make Inventing Easier

Wavy Line
Scott Shane

Professor at Case Western Reserve University

Scott Shane is the A. Malachi Mixon III professor of entrepreneurial studies at Case Western Reserve University. His books includeIllusions of Entrepreneurship: The Costly Myths That Entrepreneurs, Investors, and Policy Makers Live by (Yale University Press, 2008) andFinding Fertile Ground: Identifying Extraordinary Opportunities for New Businesses(Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005).

Editor's Pick

Related Topics

Business News

What Is a 'Lazy Girl Job'? New TikTok Trend Empowers Women to Work However They Want

The trend began as a way for women to find more free time during their days.

Business Process

The Strategy You Need to Make Sure Your Company Can Keep Up in Today's Business World

Discover a superior alternative to a traditional business strategy that prioritizes adaptability, innovation and speed in execution, explores its benefits for entrepreneurs, see real-world scenarios and learn core principles and rules to propel organizations forward with clarity, simplicity and action.

Devices

This Versatile MacBook Is Only $299.97 During the Back-to-School Sale

Fid out how to get a MacBook Air that's sleek, portable, and reliable for a great price.

Business Ideas

The Top 10 Home Business Ideas for 2023

Can't figure out which enterprise you should launch in 2023? Check out 10 stellar home business ideas to get inspiration.

Thought Leaders

I Pitched 300 People a Day For 1 Year — and Learned This Impactful Entrepreneurial Lesson

After working myself to the bone pitching 300 people each day for one year, I came out of that experience as a new man — but surprisingly, an unhappier one. Here's what I learned.