In the U.S., the inventor has a "first to invent" claim which is different from other patenting organizations throughout the world who generally utilize "first to file." Debate over this issue, and which model best influences economic development is ongoing. Some are concerned that a change in patent rights may harm the small startup and benefit the incumbents with deeper pockets. You can read more about this topic.

During development, IP Street was very fortunate and grateful to have early partners that signed on to use our tools, often in beta form. Through timely and constructive feedback, our partners were instrumental in helping us develop features that evolved from "interesting and cool" to "nice to have" to "got to have". Below is a sampling of some of the enterprise partners who understood our vision very early on. They became annual subscribers and were afforded the benefits of having direct access to our development team, enabling us to design more relevant tools and allowing them to enjoy influence in design priorities. They include: Alibaba, Amazon, Lee & Hayes, PAML, T-Mobile. Thank you to all of our enterprise partners.

Joseph Schumpeter, known as the Prophet of Innovation, describes the importance of inventors in his Theory of Economic Development. Inventors are the "fiery-spirits" that disrupt the status quo with their vision of doing things 'better, faster, cheaper.' In the process, their inventions represent "the heroic intervention of individual men (or women) who appear as leaders toward new economic shores." We believe that intellectual assets, commonly taking the form of patented technology, are the least-understood and most-relevant resources to stimulate economic development through innovation. To make this happen, intellectual property (IP) needs to be more comprehensively understood so that better business decisions can be executed. This is why we are in business. An invention must have economic utility to benefit society. Some times, inventions are way before their time. However, most of the time, the business execution to commercialize the invention fails. In fact, those that conceptualize the invention rarely reap the rewards of the innovation's ultimate success.

When approached with this legal assertion, as a patent counselor for your client, you need insights to help you define and determine your defense. No, I am not: A patent is defined by its language, and many times, proper preparation for a Markman Hearing, or Claim Construction Hearing, can determine the summary judgment. If you are accused of infringing on a claim, you want to find ways to minimize the scope of the claim [on the other hand, if you are accusing, you want to broaden a claim's scope]. With IP Street, you can scrutinize a claim in various ways. Your patent is invalid: Since the USPTO granted the patent, the presumption is that all of its claims are valid. Anyone can challenge the validity of a patent (request re-examination) whether or not an infringement injunction has been made. [Normally, when the USPTO learns of an infringement lawsuit, out of due diligence, they open a re-examination case.] The quickest path to invalidate a patent is to identify prior art.

Laws of nature: Galileo would not be able to patent his findings from his experiments at the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Physical phenomena: Patent law classifies physical phenomena as products of nature. Thus, if your invention occurs in nature, it is a physical phenomenon and cannot be patented. Abstract ideas: Abstract ideas are concepts like pure mathematics and algorithms. You cannot patent a formula. However, you can patent an application of that formula. Thus, while you cannot patent a mathematical formula that produces nonrepeating patterns, you can patent paper products that use that formula to prevent rolls of paper from sticking together. Literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works: These can be Copyright protected. Inventions, which are considered not useful or possible: For example, the USPTO will not issue a patent on a perpetual motion machines; or offensive to public morality.