MASTERCLASS Patents for Entrepreneurs – Part 3: Patent Strategy
Ola Wassvik opens with the same core mindset shift as before: patents protect the business, not the technology. Without revenue or investment behind it, a patent is just a plaque on the wall. What you're really protecting is investor capital, future revenue, and your margins and pricing power, since a patent monopoly lets you hold strong margins, while competition from a copycat product craters them fast. Patent spend should scale with the money at stake (investment and revenue), not with how technically complex or hard-won the underlying R&D was.
Key basics
There are two base strategies. A defensive strategy aims to give you freedom to operate and prevent copying, using a rule of thumb of spending 1 to 2 percent of your investment or future revenue on patents, treated as business insurance. A licensing strategy fits fields where you can't realistically build the whole product yourself, like telecom, semiconductors, and increasingly biotech, where patents themselves are your product. Here, the target is a 10 to 1 rule: at least 10 times more revenue than what you spend on patents and know-how. Idea supply is never the real constraint (even a 1 percent improvement is patentable), budget is. Most companies actually sit somewhere on a spectrum between the two, and this can vary by product, business area, or country. Never patent your actual secret sauce, meaning anything no one could figure out without your source code or manufacturing line.
Strategy
Where you file matters: aim to cover wherever 90 percent of your revenue comes from, not device count, which for most Western companies means the US, Europe, and often Japan or Korea. China is a special case, favoring domestic companies, so a local partner is usually the better path there rather than treating Chinese patents like a US or German filing.
Your portfolio should evolve by stage. Pre-seed usually gets you one broad "checkbox" patent, mainly to signal seriousness to investors. At seed, aim for around five patents across different types (conceptual, component, product, system) to show you know what you're doing, even without full coverage yet. By Series A, expect 20 to 25 patents for real protection on your first product, and be ready for investors to run technical due diligence on your portfolio. As you keep scaling, licensing companies should see portfolio size track company value directly, while defensive companies should focus on spreading coverage broadly rather than stacking patents on one area. The end goal in both cases is protecting revenue and margins.
FAQ
Do patents mainly exist so I can sue competitors?
No. A strong patent portfolio exists so you avoid court entirely. Litigation is expensive and risky. The real value is discouraging competitors and copycats before it ever gets that far.
How much should I actually spend on patents?
For a defensive strategy, a rough guide is 1 to 2 percent of your investment or projected revenue. For a licensing strategy, aim for at least 10 times more revenue than what you spend on patents and know-how.
Should patent spend scale with how hard the technology was to build?
No. It should scale with the money at stake (investment and revenue), not R&D effort or technical complexity. A highly complex product with small projected revenue still doesn't justify heavy patent spend.
Which countries should I file patents in?
Focus on wherever roughly 90 percent of your revenue comes from, not raw sales volume. For most Western companies that's the US, Europe, and sometimes Japan or Korea. China needs a different approach, often through a local partner.
How many patents should I have at each funding stage?
Roughly one broad patent at pre-seed, about five varied patents by seed, and 20 to 25 patents by Series A for real product-level protection, scaling further as revenue and funding grow.
DISCLAIMER: THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE. YOU SHOULD CONTACT A PATENT ATTORNEY IF YOU NEED A FORMAL ASSESSMENT OF PATENT INFRINGEMENT OR FREEDOM TO OPERATE.


.png)







.webp)