“Patents add fuel to the fire of genius.” Abraham Lincoln, the only U.S. president to have received a patent.
I am often asked by investors to assess the value and relevance of a founder’s intellectual property to guide decisions on whether to invest. A well-drafted patent is a thing of beauty – it signals foresight, precision, and commercial strength. Conversely, a poorly written specification is an affront.
Investors need confidence that their money will be well spent and their investment protected. This includes securing exclusivity around the technology. Without that assurance, investors will look elsewhere for opportunities that offer stronger protection.
The following are some of my pet peeves I have encountered in patent drafting.
DIY shudders
Mark Summerfield of Patentology recently reported that data from the Australian Patent Office shows a sharp increase in self-filed provisional applications, and it is suspected that this has resulted through the use of generative AI. While these filings still represent a small share of total applications, the trend is worrying as there is the real possibility that many quality inventions will not be successfully commercialised with no protections around them.
Patent attorneys often shudder when they come across AI or self-drafted patent applications. Unfortunately, what can look like a cost-saving shortcut to an inventor can quickly turn into an expensive minefield of legal and strategic problems. The reality is that poorly drafted patent specifications can cause more harm than sometimes not having any patent protection. And they can be difficult, if not impossible to fix.
Another potential complication arising from AI generated invention disclosures is that an inventor is effectively training the AI data-set putting their invention out into the AI ether for others to pick up on or perhaps even anticipate their own invention.
When even “professional” drafting falls short
It is not only self-drafted applications that can suffer from poor quality. I have come across patent applications filed by “professionals” where it is clear that an invention disclosure from the inventor has only been tinkered with. In these cases, the “drafter” has merely put the specification into a particular format and added patentese wording.
Clearly the drafter has not invested the effort to understand the commercial purpose of the patent nor explored the full potential of the invention.
These shortcomings are often easy to spot.
The patent specifications tend to rely heavily on limiting technical terms, which can unnecessarily narrow the scope of protection. Instead of shaping claims to cover variations and anticipate competitive designs, the specification clings to the inventor’s original wording without strategic refinement. The result is a patent that may technically meet filing requirements but fails to deliver meaningful commercial value.
What good drafting looks like
Skilled practitioners understand, decide, tailor, anticipate and align.
They understand the invention and shape the claim architecture. They identify which features are essential and which are optional, ensuring claims are broad enough to protect but narrow enough to withstand scrutiny.
They decide what to include or omit. They know when to add examples or remove what can be kept a trade secret.
They tailor for different jurisdictions. Requirements vary between patent offices, so they adapt language and claim formats to meet these standards.
They anticipate examiner’s objections. Experienced drafters foresee objections like lack of inventive step or insufficient disclosure and address them upfront.
They align with business strategy. Patents are not just legal documents; they are commercial tools, and they ensure drafting supports licensing, enforcement, and freedom-to-operate goals.
Real-world consequences of bad patent drafting
Poorly drafted applications can lead to:
- Reluctance by investors to invest
- Narrow or invalid claim scope that opens the door for competitors to compete
- Expensive rejections or delays due to arguments with patent offices
Final thoughts
Self-drafting may look like a shortcut, but patent drafting demands precision, legal insight, and strategic thinking that technology cannot replicate. Even with automated assistance, experienced patent attorneys add essential value by shaping content, anticipating challenges, and aligning protection with business objectives. In short, tools can help, but they cannot guarantee a strong patent.
Because when it comes to patents, cutting corners today can cost you the whole invention tomorrow.
