I am a solo founder building in AI B2B infra.
I am filing provisional patents on some core technical approaches so I can share more openly with early design partners and investors.
Curious from folks who have raised Pre-Seed/Seed or worked with early-stage companies: - Do provisionals meani...
I am filing provisional patents on some core technical approaches so I can share more openly with early design partners and investors.
Curious from folks who have raised Pre-Seed/Seed or worked with early-stage companies: - Do provisionals meaningfully help in fundraising or partnerships? - Or were they mostly noise until later rounds / real traction?
I am trying to calibrate how much time/energy to put into IP vs just shipping + user traction at this stage.
Would love to hear real world experiences.
Comments
By SkyPuncher 2026-02-0916:54 There are exceptions to ever rule, but generally patents are (1) not incredibly important in software (2) solving a question that's secondary.
The biggest risk to building a startup isn't "can I build this thing" (feasibility risk). It's "will people even care if I build this thing" (value risk) then "can I do it in a way people use" (usability risk). Patents help solve business risk, but that's generally considered to be the 4th (and last) of the risks.
There are exceptions where patents do need to be filed first or the business viability dies. However, I generally assume that if you've addressed value, usability, and feasibility risks to create something truly meaningful, your competitors will find a work around to deliver the same value, usability, and feasibility without infringing on your patent. Thus, patents, are nothing but a minor inconvenience. In some cases, the public filing of a patent, can give your competitors a leg up on competing with you.
By allinonetools_ 2026-02-0916:101 reply From what I have seen, early investors care far more about speed, adoption, and clarity of problem than provisionals. Patents help later, but at pre-seed/seed they rarely change a decision unless IP is the product. Shipping and learning usually wins.
By gdad 2026-02-0916:35 aligned. And that is also what i am focussed on. But a friend suggested this as an optionality and I am wondering if it makes sense.
By josefritzishere 2026-02-0919:202 reply I work in IP. You can easily operate without patents. Patents cost money to file and maintain. Most patents exist only for marketing purposes. Enforcement also isn't cheap. So, unless the IP is perceived to be highly valuable, corporations don't bother filing the patent. Only a fraction of what's patentable ever gets patented.
By SOLAR_FIELDS 2026-02-0923:301 reply Well, there’s also the fact that some organizations actually tie career progression to patents authored by the company. My brother works for a company that offers multiple technical career pathways to promotion, and one of them is essentially “obtain a software patent”
By SOLAR_FIELDS 2026-02-110:17 You ain’t wrong. My brother works for LargeGovernmentContractor but the thesis is the same as the Broadcom’s and the IBM’s of the world in this regard
By gdad 2026-02-108:07 really helpful pov.
