A lot of work goes into constructing claim charts, analyzing patents, but this is done all over again in each patent litigation case. It would be great to share patent analysis data to bring down litigation costs to fight back patent trolls easier. That would help industry a lot. Usually even competing companies unite in fighting patent trolls. Prior art claim chart comparing against troll patents would be a great help if that would be accessible to masses.

Is there a place to find and share such documents? Is there a way to do it here?

3 Answers 3


I believe only this site covers this, through the mechanism. This would be the case even if it is answered by the question asker. Although prior art requests were intended for use for pre-grant applications, the same analysis applies whether pre-grant or post-grant.

A validity analysis can be displayed using an answer (though not in a table, since Stack Exchange doesn't support them). For example:

Claim 1

  1. An apparatus, comprising:

Shown in '789 at para 4.

a first widget; and

Shown in '789 at para 6.

a second widget.

Shown in '789 at Fig 1.

Therefore claim 1 is not novel over '789.

As an aside, a claim chart is a small part of an approach for analysing the validity of a claim, and really only works when considering novelty. It never really stands alone, since it requires a lot of further textual discussion to provide a full validity analysis. A claim chart alone would likely not assist someone who is being sued by a patent holder.

  • But the problem with posting on this website is that how you formulate the question by posting analysis, claim chart for sharing? And what would the answer to the "question" be/mean? It just doesn't fit the website format. But it seams that it still is the only way.
    – alex
    Mar 9, 2016 at 10:10
  • It's a little artificial, but I think the question would be "prior art request for this patent" and the answer would be your claim chart. The answer on this question effectively shows a claim chart. And this way, you might even get some additional help from other users.
    – Maca
    Mar 9, 2016 at 10:16
  • @alex, now that you have clarified your question, YES, this site is created for the exact purpose: blog.stackoverflow.com/2012/09/…
    – daniel
    Mar 9, 2016 at 12:13
  • @daniel, not exactly. The question was where to submit documents. Blog entry you linked to does not address publishing analysis, but rather identifying prior art and discussing subtleties. Publishing troll patent claim charts and analysis here was not initial idea. Thanks anyway,
    – alex
    Mar 9, 2016 at 13:25

There are many reasons why people shouldn't share such information:

  • Company A won't be interested in what company B has to say unless they operate in the same industry, i.e. they are competitors.

  • The cost of each patent analysis is high, so companies will likely do analysis only if needed, which would include defenses against infringement claims.

  • Anything you say can, and will be, used against you. This is why in patent application you should avoid discussing other patents because such discussion could be taken as admission.

You don't want your competitor to anticipate what you might say in your effort to invalidate their patent or defend yourself against infringement claim. Participation in public disclosure would be a messy and costly business because then you need to get attorneys involved in determining the risk of your disclosure.

Another problem is that patent law is a moving target. Every now and then the courts would have opinions that have far reaching impact on how patents are filed and interpreted. In other words, analysis done right now probably becomes out-of-date in a few years.

Still another problem is that you don't know which patents are important. Many questions posted here are related to patent applications that are abandoned. Analysis could become a waste of time when the patent/patent application in question get abandoned.

  • I agree with everything you've said about whether businesses would (or should) share their analysis. However, I wonder if it doesn't quite answer the question (which is whether there is a place to share such things). I think the answer to that question is yes: this site!
    – Maca
    Mar 9, 2016 at 9:15
  • Not sure if I was understood correctly. Let's say during patent litigation an attorney produced a bunch of claim charts comparing opponent's patent vs prior art. If opponent is a patent troll sharing prior art claim chart would simply help industry fending off the trolls. There is no information related to the company. Would it not? Regarding the waste of time - the analysis in some cases would have been produced for litigation, in other cases as a prevention. Macca, claim charts are not very compatible with question formatting or a question in general.
    – alex
    Mar 9, 2016 at 9:25
  • Agreed. While this site isn't a database, it's still the best source. I also don't think claim charts are useful, especially considering a patent usually cite a dozen or so prior arts. A more useful analysis would be "this claims A, B, C ~ G, but the subject matter is really just E and F"
    – daniel
    Mar 9, 2016 at 9:34
  • I meant claim charts against prior art not mentioned in patents (or mentioned, doesn't really matter). Multiple companies attacked by the same troll would produce multiple analysis with different prior art, from different perspectives. I update the question.
    – alex
    Mar 9, 2016 at 9:44

You may find it helpful in such analysis, to have a persistent identifier for documents and collections that allows full reuse and no privacy compromises. The Lens has been working at this for many years as an open, digital public good, and has developed an open public, persistent LensID for patent documents, including applications. These can be annotated, shared (or not) as any user wishes, with no one - including Google or Google Analytics - knowing or sharing who users are or what they're doing.

FYI for prior art considerations and to help in claims analysis (especially novelty and non-obviousness/inventive step), Lens has extracted almost 30M non-patent citations and matched them to DOIs and PMIDs (persistent identifiers) and allows exploration of this art. Here's an example from one of my old (lapsed) patents.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .