The problem with the ‘Patent Landscape’ technique

In the IP field, we often hear the term ‘patent landscape’ as a method to provide the necessary data about a specific patent. However, is this method really that effective? What is the problem with the ‘patent landscape’ technique?

Patent landscape

A patent landscape is an analysis of patent data that reveals business, scientific and technological trends. Landscape reports typically focus on a single industry, technology, or geographic region.

According to WIPO, patent landscape reports (PLRs) provide a snapshot of the patent situation of a specific technology, either within a given country or region or globally. They can inform policy discussions, strategic research planning, or technology transfer. They may also be used to analyze the validity of patents based on data about their legal status.

A PLR begins with a state-of-the-art search for the relevant technology in selected patent databases. The search results are then analyzed to answer specific questions that the researcher deemed necessary for his/her works or other related purposes. 

The results of the patent landscape technique are presented visually to assist understanding and conclusions or recommendations based on the empirical evidence are provided.

Is the patent landscape technique that useful?

Although the patent landscape technique is considered highly by many international organizations and it is, in fact, a very important step to check the patentability of an invention. 

However, the question here is although it is useful, is it that useful?

According to David Macaskill, a partner at James & Wells in Hamilton and Tauranga, although we can’t deny the role of patent landscaping, we can’t use it to determine everything: “I believe that patentability searching is a critical aspect of securing strong patent protection. It helps you to define the scope of the claims by reference to what is new and, arguably, inventive.”

Nonetheless, on a more general approach, patent landscaping has its limits and isn’t that important to the overall result: “I’ve found patent landscaping a more general approach which looks at the information at a high level of generalization. It can be a useful first step if you are trying to define your commercial direction or make macro-level decisions. However, for assessing patentability and defining what to claim in a patent, patent landscaping searching is not a useful tool. You would need to bury more into the detail to establish what is a good patent.”

Sharing the same opinion with Macaskill, Stephen Yang, managing partner at IP March in Beijing, stated: ”Patent mapping or landscaping may be helpful to identify technology trends, competitive analysis, and risk assessment. However, there is still a lot more work needed to identify good patents.”

He added: “There is also the point that patent landscaping searches are often completed based on keywords used in the patent specifications or abstracts. In contrast, the strength of a patent is assessed based on the claims. This is another reason why a patent landscape search may not be a useful tool for assessing the strength of a patent.”

AAA IPRIGHT – Global IP – Global Trademark Registration

Contact AAA IPRIGHT: Email: [email protected]

Or sending your inquiry by filling the form: