Ask HN: Would you use a fast/cheap "prior art" service instead of a patent?
We’re exploring a tech-focused IP platform that helps startups publish fast, affordable “prior art” disclosures. The goal is to protect inventions without the cost or delay of patents, especially in this AI age where things move quickly.
The core proposition is: for a few hundred dollars, you get a timestamped, public disclosure that blocks others from patenting your idea.
We're trying to validate if this is truly valuable for early-stage founders.
Would you consider this a valid alternative to a low-value patent?
What would make you trust a platform offering this?
Is the $250-$500 price point compelling?
We also have a completely anonymous 60-second survey if you prefer that format: https://forms.gle/KSSWGc68RkNT9G8n6
We'll share a summary of the results here afterward. All perspectives are appreciated.
This sounds vaguely like a "patent equivalent" of places like Copyright House. I think the biggest thing you'd have to convince people of is why they'd use your service versus just self-publishing the patent notes on their blog which counts as self-disclosure and should (operative word) give you a year's grace to file for the actual patent.
https://copyrighthouse.org
If I remember correctly, one has a year to patent an invention once it is publicly disclosed so I don’t see how this service offers any protection
How does disclosing an invention protect it? Protect it from what and for how long? If a patent isn't filed eventually then competitors can file.
Why not publish the invention on a blog?
Why not keep the invention a secret?
"Disclose" is kinda ambiguous here.
One of the hindrances to getting a patent is prior art. Meaning that the thing you're trying yo patent already exists.
After a patent is issued lots of people typically say "but that's obvious". Ok, so let's capture the obvious before someone patents it.
Equally, I might be doing something which is patentable, but I have no interest in patenting it. By registering it somewhere I make it easy for the patent office to search, thus turning down a patent application. Thus preventing me being sued by some new patent holder.
But to answer the question, no I wouldn't use a service like this. Partly because I wouldn't spend the money and partly because (in isolation) the service doesn't work. Unless the patent office is involved and actively using it, bad patents still get granted.
Yes, it might add some weight to a court case where I'm being sued, but honestly if I get there I've already lost. And my code backups show the same thing anyway.
Plus, which of the thousands of things I am doing, should I register? Am I supposed to trawl through my code deciding on each line if it's novel? If I do all this work I might as well just get a patent. That can at least be used in cross-licencing agreements.
Yes, software patents are a blight, but I'm not sure this is really a solution.
It's not so much for founders. Founders should just do the idea; see if others are doing it first. Form the LLC that can roll over and die if it smacks into a patent.
Your customers are the patent lawyers who need to do that research.
Your competitor is every AI.
There is no poor man’s patent.
Invention might not require them, but “patent” always means lawyers because patents are entirely a legal construct. Good luck.