Start with the problem, not the patent jargon
The first filing decision starts with dates, not with a country list. Work backwards from the earliest moment an invention became available to someone outside your team. A demonstration to a potential buyer, a research poster, a sales pitch and an unrestricted online video are not necessarily treated the same way. Confidentiality terms, what was actually revealed, who could access it and whether an application had already been filed can all affect the answer. The purpose of this directory is to identify which question must be reviewed first, not to assume that a disclosure automatically ends every possibility.
Choose the guide that matches your situation
- Already shared your invention? Find out what you can still protect. — Check My Disclosure Options.
- Launching a product? Check your patent filing plan first. — Check My Pre-Launch Filing Plan.
Research guide: choosing the correct filing decision
Should you investigate an earlier disclosure or prepare a filing before an upcoming launch?
For an earlier disclosure, reconstruct the publication history using the actual slide deck, prototype photographs, demonstration invitations and correspondence. For a future launch, identify which technical features are genuinely ready to describe now and which are still being developed. A business announcement that merely describes intended benefits may disclose different information from a demonstration showing how a device operates. This distinction is important when assessing what was known to the public and what the patent application can responsibly support.
What the official rules actually distinguish
Patent systems generally evaluate novelty against prior disclosures, but their exceptions differ. Some jurisdictions provide limited grace-period relief, while others have narrow exceptions. Under EPC Article 55, certain abusive disclosures and qualifying exhibition disclosures may be disregarded in defined circumstances; it is not a general allowance for ordinary commercial announcements. A first filing may also establish a priority date only for subject matter actually disclosed in that application. Adding a new working feature later can require separate analysis rather than treating the original filing date as covering all later improvements.
A practical decision sequence
Begin with a dated timeline: invention completion, confidential sharing, first public presentation, first patent application and intended product announcement. Next, separate information revealed to outsiders from material kept confidential. Third, compare the proposed claims against the technical disclosure available at each date. Finally, choose whether the immediate question is disclosure impact, drafting readiness, country strategy or an urgent filing instruction. This order reduces the risk of choosing a patent route before knowing whether the invention description and chronology support it.
Compare the possible paths
| Your situation | What to verify before acting |
|---|---|
| An earlier conference, video or demonstration | Reconstruct what was accessible and when; evaluate country-specific disclosure treatment |
| A launch that has not happened | Identify filing-ready technical content and the planned announcement date |
| An earlier provisional or first application | Compare supporting disclosure, inventors and the next priority step |
| A new improvement discovered later | Determine whether it was disclosed originally or needs separate treatment |
This comparison is a starting point, not an office-specific determination. Write down the evidence that makes each row relevant to your case and verify the governing rule for the office or territory involved. A similar-sounding issue may belong to another procedure if the application is at a different stage.
Documents that make a review more useful
| Record | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Presentation or webpage archive | Shows what people actually saw and its earliest available date |
| Confidentiality correspondence | Distinguishes restricted sharing from unrestricted access |
| Original technical notes | Connects the invention as developed with proposed claim features |
| Earlier filing receipt and specification | Establishes what was filed and when |
| Launch calendar and publication schedule | Identifies decisions that may need immediate attention |
An initial enquiry can describe the problem without attaching unpublished technical details. Preserve original files, dates and office correspondence securely. If an imminent statutory period may apply, treat an ordinary email as an enquiry rather than proof that an office has received a filing or that a professional has accepted an instruction.
Limits and mistakes to avoid
Do not assume that a non-disclosure agreement cures a disclosure that was already public. Nor should an inventor conclude that any conversation with a customer destroyed novelty everywhere. The precise content of the conversation and the governing national rules matter. A patent filing is also not permission to market a regulated product; commercialization clearance and patentability answer different questions. For time-sensitive facts, take prompt advice from a professional entitled to act before the relevant office.
Examples of why the facts change the answer
A laboratory researcher publishes an abstract, a founder circulates a confidential investor deck, and a manufacturer uploads a product demonstration on social media. All three may use the word “launch,” but their patent questions are not interchangeable. The researcher needs to compare the abstract’s technical content and date with proposed claims; the founder needs to establish whether access was controlled; the manufacturer needs to identify exactly what the public video revealed. A useful filing strategy records those distinctions rather than treating all public contact as one event.
How to prepare a clear next-step brief
Begin with a one-sentence description of the problem. Add the first relevant filing or disclosure date, the country or patent office and the stage of the application. Record the exact question you need answered and list the official notices or dated originals that support it. If there are several alternative routes, state which outcomes matter to you and which destinations are merely being explored. Separate what you know from what requires confirmation. That creates a more useful enquiry than uploading an entire unpublished invention file without context.
For any decision that requires filing, legal opinion or formal office representation, confirm the engagement and the person's authority in the relevant jurisdiction before relying on the work. Information pages can explain possibilities and organize facts; they cannot guarantee that an office will accept a request or grant a right.
How to compare a disclosure with the invention you want to protect
A practical disclosure review should not simply label an entire product “disclosed” or “undisclosed.” Break the planned claims into essential technical features. For each feature, record whether the audience could understand it from the material actually made available. Note whether demonstrations showed internal operation or only an external result, whether supporting documentation was distributed and whether attendees had any binding restrictions. An internal technical drawing may be detailed, but it is not automatically a public disclosure merely because it existed before filing. Equally, a conference abstract may reveal more than its title suggests.
The date record should distinguish preparation, submission, online posting, first open access and the presentation itself. Save the relevant versions and source links while they are available. A later change to a website cannot establish that the earlier version was never public. If multiple countries are contemplated, the inventor should receive a separate analysis for each materially different disclosure exception. The legal question is tied to specific content and applicable rules, not merely whether an event was marketed as “private.” This method also helps the patent drafter identify what was supported before a product was changed or improved.
Common follow-up questions
Can an NDA always preserve my patent rights?
No universal answer is possible. Read the confidentiality terms and examine whether information also became accessible outside that arrangement.
Does filing in one country protect me internationally?
No. Patent rights are territorial, and later filings depend on the relevant international, regional or national procedure.
Can I claim a new improvement using my old filing date?
Only to the extent the earlier application provides the required support under the applicable rules; new matter needs its own assessment.
Official references
More patent guidance
Explore the Patent Help directory, the existing Filing Strategy guide and the related topic guide. These references serve different decisions; a general filing overview is not a substitute for a procedural deadline check.
This material provides general patent information and research guidance only. It is not legal advice, does not create an attorney–client relationship, and does not guarantee a filing, grant or other result. Current office requirements and the specific facts of the case must be checked with an appropriately qualified professional.
