This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, our host and the founder of IPWatchdog, Gene Quinn, speaks with Robert Plotkin. A patent attorney, computer scientist, and longtime software and AI practitioner, Plotkin discusses the relationship between hardware and software innovation and why legal distinctions that ignore how technology actually operates can produce flawed patent analysis.
Quinn and Plotkin examine the continuing challenges surrounding patent eligibility, including the tendency to use Section 101 as a shortcut for questions that more appropriately belong under enablement, written description, novelty, or non-obviousness. They also discuss the risks of treating software as inherently simple or predictable, and the importance of evaluating AI and software inventions on their technological facts rather than through rigid labels that ignore deliberate design choices.
The conversation also addresses the emerging AI patent gold rush and the difference between patent volume and patent value. Plotkin explains why companies should identify the specific technological capability they had to develop, determine whether it provides a meaningful competitive advantage, and align prosecution strategy with the business objective—whether product protection, fundraising, acquisition, monetization, or licensing. For startups and established companies alike, the discussion offers a practical framework for deciding what to patent, what may be better protected as a trade secret, and when an invention is sufficiently developed to justify pursuing patent protection.
Podden och tillhörande omslagsbild på den här sidan tillhör
Gene Quinn. Innehållet i podden är skapat av Gene Quinn och inte av,
eller tillsammans med, Poddtoppen.
