Guest Post
By Ron Toledano, IP Lawyer, Partner
Protecting intellectual property (IP) is generally considered essential in business as it not only safeguards innovative work but can also enhance the overall value of a company. Trademarks protect brands and reputations, copyrights protect creative works, and patents protect inventions, all of which enhance market value.
In the quantum computing field today, the choices regarding how to protect inventions can be challenging because the current landscape is fragmented, with several competing methods and no clear leader.
Each quantum computing method comes with its own advantages and disadvantages related to features such as accuracy, speed, cost, and coherence time. For example, superconducting qubits can have high gate speeds but require extremely low temperatures to operate, while the photonic method manipulates the quantum state of particles of light in a manner that can operate at warmer temperatures.
As a result, a company’s advantage over another can be tied to inventiveness in a particular hardware design, the application of algorithms, a method for cooling, or even efficiencies surrounding power consumption.
Complicating matters further is the evolving nature of quantum computing and the subsequent fluidity surrounding the timing of disclosure, commercial direction, and financial allocation. Companies must therefore carefully and continuously weigh the risks and rewards involved in revealing sensitive information through patenting versus protecting proprietary inventions via trade secrets.
Remember that with patenting, inventors provide a detailed and comprehensive description of their invention in a patent application. This is the “exchange” for potentially obtaining the exclusive right to commercially exploit the invention for a limited period. That involves a risk of disclosure. Further, companies must also consider the financial cost and delays associated with patenting, which can become considerable when filing national applications in multiple countries.
On the flip side, companies can choose to keep their invention a trade secret. At first glance, this appears less costly, but the choice is not always obvious because the trade secret path requires assessing whether the necessary infrastructure is in place to prevent disclosures. This often involves written agreements, employee training, and robust IT security to mitigate vulnerabilities and guard against potential hackers.
Bottom line: Quantum computing IP protection is still in a fluid and dynamic phase, with changing needs and priorities. As such, strategies for protection need to be reevaluated regularly to stay ahead of competitors in a fast-moving market.
