JP2010061445A - Method, device and program for patent search - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To easily determine presence or absence of strategy for intellectual property. <P>SOLUTION: In a patent search device, a control part extracts a category of invention from patent publication of a patent applicant to be searched after narrowing down the number of manufacturers to be searched. The categories includes a patent having a system claim, a patent having a method claim, a patent by divided application, a patent by continuous application or the like. The control part determines the presence or absence of strategy for intellectual property based on the ratio of the patents including the category to the number of applications depending on the category. The control part also narrows down the number of patent applicants by taking increase or decrease of the number of applications and the year of peak in applications or the like into account. <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2010,JPO&INPIT

Description

  The present invention relates to a patent search method, apparatus, and program.

In recent years, infringement lawsuits between companies have become active. For this reason, in order to avoid infringement, etc., it is a common practice to investigate the existence of an intellectual property strategy of a competing manufacturer.
Examples of a method for investigating the presence or absence of an intellectual property strategy include a method for investigating the number of patent applications of competing manufacturers and the number of registrations.

However, when it is determined whether there is a leading patent based on the results of a detailed investigation of the content of the patent gazette of a competing manufacturer, the investigation takes a great deal of man-hours.
For this reason, a method of analyzing technical literature data by a computer and acquiring the result is known (for example, see Patent Literature 1).
JP 2007-102714 A

  For example, in Patent Document 1, the analysis result is output by paying attention to the technical field of the patent application and the application time, but in addition to this, the category of the invention, the patent by the continuation application (hereinafter referred to as “continuation patent”) The presence or absence of an IP strategy can also be determined based on the presence or absence of a patent (hereinafter referred to as “division patent”).

However, when such an investigation is performed, as described above, a great amount of man-hours are required.
The present invention has been made in view of these points, and an object of the present invention is to provide a patent search method, apparatus, and program that can easily check the presence or absence of an intellectual property strategy.

  In order to achieve the above object, the present invention provides a computer that is capable of accessing a patent database storing table information storing applicant information to be searched and patent gazette information. The ratio of the applicant stored in the table with respect to the total number of applications in a predetermined category is extracted, and the aggressiveness of the applicant's intellectual property strategy stored in the table is determined based on the extraction result.

  According to the disclosed patent search method, it is possible to easily determine the presence or absence of an intellectual property strategy, so that it is possible to save labor for the search.

Hereinafter, embodiments will be described in detail with reference to the drawings.
FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a hardware configuration example of the patent research apparatus.
The entire patent research apparatus 100 is controlled by a CPU (Central Processing Unit) 101. A random access memory (RAM) 102, a hard disk drive (HDD) 103, a graphic processing device 104, an input interface 105, and a communication interface 106 are connected to the CPU 101 via a bus 107.

  The RAM 102 temporarily stores at least part of an OS (Operating System) program and application programs to be executed by the CPU 101. The RAM 102 stores various data necessary for processing by the CPU 101. The HDD 103 stores an OS and application programs. A program file is stored in the HDD 103.

  A monitor 11 is connected to the graphic processing device 104. The graphic processing device 104 displays an image on the screen of the monitor 11 in accordance with a command from the CPU 101. A keyboard 12 and a mouse 13 are connected to the input interface 105. The input interface 105 transmits a signal transmitted from the keyboard 12 or the mouse 13 to the CPU 101 via the bus 107.

  The communication interface 106 is connected to the network 10. The communication interface 106 transmits / receives data to / from another computer and the database 20 of the US patent via the network 10.

  With the hardware configuration as described above, the processing functions of the present embodiment can be realized. In the system having such a hardware configuration, the following functions are provided in the patent research apparatus 100.

FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating functions of the patent research apparatus.
The patent research apparatus 100 includes a manufacturer information storage unit 110, a survey target manufacturer determination unit 120, a control unit 130, and a display unit 140.

The manufacturer information storage unit 110 stores information about each manufacturer.
The survey target manufacturer determination unit 120 determines a patent search target manufacturer (survey target manufacturer) based on the information stored in the manufacturer information storage unit.

The control unit 130 creates an index for determining whether there is an intellectual property strategy for the survey target manufacturer determined by the survey target manufacturer determination unit 120.
The display unit 140 displays a screen on the monitor 11 in accordance with an instruction from the control unit 130.

Next, information stored in the manufacturer information storage unit 110 will be described.
FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating information stored in the manufacturer information storage unit.
The manufacturer information storage unit 110 stores information in a table.

The manufacturer information table 110a has columns of company name, head office, purchase contract, and risk information, and information arranged in the horizontal direction of each column is associated with each other.
In the company name column, a name for uniquely identifying the company name is stored.

The name of the country where the head office is located is stored in the head office column. A manufacturer whose head office is in Japan is called a “domestic manufacturer”.
The purchase contract column stores the presence or absence of a purchase contract with a company that uses the patent research apparatus 100. In FIG. 3, “A” or “B” indicates that a purchase contract is concluded, and “x” indicates that a purchase contract is not concluded. Further, “A” indicates that the rank (reliability) in which the purchase contract is concluded is higher than that of “B”.

  The presence or absence of risk information is stored in the risk information column. Here, “having risk information” means, for example, a case where a powerful patent is found on the Web or the like, or a case where the existence of a powerful patent is notified in advance.

Next, the process of the survey target manufacturer determination unit 120 will be described.
FIG. 4 is a flowchart showing the process of the survey target manufacturer determination unit.
First, with respect to one record, it is determined whether or not it is a domestic manufacturer by referring to the head office column of the manufacturer information table 110a (step S1).

If the manufacturer is a domestic manufacturer (Yes in step S1), the manufacturer is determined to be a manufacturer not subject to investigation (step S2), and the process ends.
On the other hand, if the manufacturer is not a domestic manufacturer (No in step S1), the purchase contract column of the manufacturer information table 110a is referred to and it is determined whether or not the purchase contract is rank A (step S3).

If the purchase contract is rank A (Yes in step S3), this manufacturer is determined to be a manufacturer not subject to investigation (step S2), and the process is terminated.
On the other hand, if the purchase contract is not A rank (No in step S3), the risk information column of the manufacturer information table 110a is referred to and it is determined whether or not the manufacturer has risk information (step S4).

If there is risk information (Yes in step S4), it is determined that the manufacturer is not subject to investigation (because it is known in advance that there is a risk) (step S2), and the process ends.
On the other hand, when there is no risk information (No in step S4), it is determined that the manufacturer is an investigation target manufacturer (step S5).

This is the end of the description of the processing.
For example, when the above processing is applied to the manufacturer information table 110a shown in FIG. 3, the companies A, B, and C become the survey target manufacturers.

Next, a process (IP strategy search process) in which the control unit 130 determines whether or not there is an IP strategy for the manufacturer to be investigated will be described.
FIG. 5 is a flowchart showing the intellectual property strategy research process.

First, the survey target manufacturer determined by the survey target manufacturer determination unit 120 or the survey year of the survey target manufacturer is narrowed down (step S11). This narrowing method will be described later.
Next, with reference to the database 20, the number of all patent registrations of the search target manufacturer (applicant) narrowed down in step S11 is investigated, and it is determined whether or not the number of all patent registrations is 10 or more (step). S12).

  If the number of patent registrations is 10 or more (Yes in step S12), the number of patent registrations for several months (for example, 2 to 3 months) of this manufacturer is searched, and the category of the invention is determined from the patent publication of the search result. Extract (step S13).

  Next, it is determined whether or not the ratio of patents (hereinafter referred to as “system patents”) including claims whose invention category is system is 50% or more for all searched patents (step S14). . This determination method will be described later. When one claim (system claim) whose invention category is system is found in one patent, it is counted as one even if another system claim exists in the patent publication.

If the percentage of system patents is 50% or more (Yes in step S14), the corresponding manufacturer is added to the list as a manufacturer having an IP strategy (step S15).
On the other hand, if the percentage of system patents is not 50% or more (No in step S14), is the percentage of patents (hereinafter referred to as “method patents”) including claims whose method category is method? It is determined whether or not (step S16).

If the percentage of method patents is 50% or more (Yes in step S16), it is determined that this manufacturer is a manufacturer having an IP strategy (step S15).
On the other hand, when the ratio of the system patent is not 50% or more (No in Step S16), it is determined whether or not the total ratio of the continuation patent and the divided patent is 20% or more for all patents (Step S17). .

When the ratio of the sum of the continuation patent and the divisional patent is 20% or more (Yes in step S17), the manufacturer is determined to be a manufacturer having an IP strategy (step S15).
Here, the threshold of the ratio of the sum of the continuation patent and the divisional patent is lower than the ratio of the system patent and the ratio of the method patent, and the number of these patents is relatively small. For this reason, there are many cases where it may be determined that the intellectual property strategy exists even if the ratio is smaller than the ratio of the system patent or the ratio of the method patent.

  On the other hand, when the ratio of the sum of the continuation patent and the divisional patent is not 20% or more (No in step S17), it is determined that the manufacturer is a manufacturer for which no IP strategy exists (step S18).

The process ends here. In steps S14 to S16, the ratios used for determination are merely examples, and it goes without saying that the ratios are not particularly limited to these ratios.
Next, the narrowing process in step S11 will be described in detail.

FIG. 6 is a flowchart showing the narrowing-down process.
First, when the manufacturer name is input by the user, the database 20 is accessed and the cumulative number is displayed on the monitor 11 (step S21). At this time, an abstract including the application type, patent number, application number and the like of each application may be displayed on the monitor 11.

Next, when the download of the patent publication is instructed by the user, the download is executed (step S22).
Next, the downloaded patent gazettes are summarized for each fiscal year based on the issue date, and are graphed (step S23).

Next, for example, based on an instruction from the user or the like, it is determined whether or not to extract a manufacturer whose number of patents has increased (step S24).
If it is determined to extract a manufacturer whose number of patents has increased (Yes in step S24), the manufacturer is extracted (step S25). Whether or not the number of patents has increased is determined by, for example, whether or not the slope of the graph is positive. As a method for investigating the inclination, for example, the number of applications by year for the past several years is extracted. Then, each year is taken on the horizontal axis, and when the number of applications in each year is taken on the vertical axis, a straight line is obtained by the least square method. Then, the inclination of the straight line is investigated.

Then, it transfers to step S12 and performs the process after step S12.
On the other hand, when it is determined not to extract a manufacturer whose number of patents has increased (No in step S24), a year with the largest number of applications of each manufacturer is extracted (step S26). Then, it transfers to step S12 and performs the process after step S12.

Thus, the process ends.
Next, a specific example will be described.
FIG. 7 is a diagram showing a patent search screen.

  On the patent search screen 11a, one or more (two in FIG. 7) applicant selection unit 111, search button 112, search number display unit 113, and download button 114 are displayed.

The applicant selection unit 111 can select only the survey target manufacturers determined in advance by the survey target manufacturer determination unit 120.
When the user selects (presses) the search button 112 in the state where the applicant (Company A to Company E in FIG. 7) is selected in the applicant selection unit 111 by the user, the applicant is displayed in the search number display unit 113. The cumulative number of patent gazettes for each is displayed. When the download button 114 is selected in this state, downloading of the patent publication is started.

FIG. 8 shows an output result screen.
On the output result screen 11b, the output results are displayed as a table.
The output result table 115 includes columns for patent number, issue date, application date, and applicant, and the information arranged in the horizontal direction of each column is associated with each other.

A number assigned by the US Patent and Trademark Office is stored in the patent number column.
The date of issue of the patent gazette is stored in the issue date column.
The filing date column stores the patent filing date.

In the “applicant” column, the applicant input to the applicant selection unit 111 is stored.
When the graphing button 116 is selected by the user, graphing of the output result table 115 is started.

FIG. 9 is a diagram showing a graph.
The graph display screen 11c displays the number of registrations of each manufacturer for each year.
When the user selects a button 117 with the words “execute processing for a manufacturer with a positive inclination”, the control unit 130 performs an intellectual property strategy investigation process and selects a manufacturer whose number of patents has increased. Extraction is performed, and processing in steps S12 to S18 is performed.

  In addition, when the user selects the button 118 with the words “execute processing for peak year”, the control unit 130 extracts the year with the largest number of applications for each manufacturer, and steps S12 to S18. Process.

FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of a patent publication.
If there is an indication “(63) Continuation of...” In the sentence after “Related US Application Data” in the downloaded patent publication 50, the control unit 130 determines that this patent is a continuation patent. If there is a display of “(62) Division of...”, It is determined that this patent is a divisional patent.

  In addition, the control unit 130 expresses “system of...” In a portion (after “Expression of“ What is claimed... ”,“ Claim... Is present, it is determined that this patent is a system patent. If the expression “apparatus of...” Exists, it is determined that this patent is a system patent. Note that the expression “apparatus of...” May not be determined to be a system patent by setting.

In addition, if the expression “method of...” Exists in the part where the claim of Patent Publication 50 is described, the control unit 130 determines that the method is a method patent.
FIG. 11 is a graph showing the results of the IP strategy research process in each manufacturer's peak year.

For each of system patents, method patents, and continuation patents, the ratio to the number of applications of each company is displayed.
In FIG. 11, the ratio of company A's system patent is 50% or more, and it can be determined that company A is a company that is actively focusing on system patents.

Further, the ratio of method patents of Company A, Company C, and Company E is 50% or more, and it can be determined that each of these manufacturers is a company that is actively focusing on method patents.
Furthermore, the ratio of the continuation patents of Company A and Company E is 20% or more, and it can be determined that these manufacturers are companies that are actively focusing on continuation patents.

Even when the button 118 is selected, the same graph as in FIG. 11 is displayed.
FIG. 12 is a diagram illustrating a result of the intellectual property strategy research process.
It can be determined that Company A, Company C and Company E are companies that are actively focusing on patents.

  As described above, according to the patent research apparatus 100, the presence / absence of a manufacturer's intellectual property strategy is determined based on the annual number of registrations, the category of claims, and the presence / absence of division / continuation patents without considering the contents of the patent. As a result, it is possible to judge the manufacturer's trends relatively easily.

  In this embodiment, it is determined whether the manufacturer has an increasing number of patents depending on whether the slope is positive or not. However, the criteria are further subdivided, and the number of patents increases every year. Whether the number of patents has remained flat after the year in which the number of patents continues has continued, or whether there has been a year in which the number of patents has leveled out and then has increased rapidly You may make it judge.

  Furthermore, it may be possible to determine whether a manufacturer has an IP strategy based on whether the number of patents has remained flat or whether the number of patents has continued to increase and then the number of patents has decreased. Good.

  Further, in the present embodiment, the control unit 130 performs the intellectual property strategy investigation process for the manufacturer determined to be the investigation target by the investigation target manufacturer determination unit 120. However, the present invention is not limited to this. For example, the manufacturer input by the user In contrast, the control unit 130 may perform the intellectual property strategy investigation process.

  As mentioned above, although the patent search method and the patent search apparatus of this invention were demonstrated based on embodiment of illustration, this invention is not limited to this, The structure of each part is arbitrary which has the same function. It can be replaced with that of the configuration. Moreover, other arbitrary structures and processes may be added to the present invention.

In addition, the present invention may be a combination of any two or more configurations (features) of the above-described embodiments.
The above processing functions can be realized by a computer. In that case, a program describing the processing contents of the functions of the patent research apparatus 100 is provided. By executing the program on a computer, the above processing functions are realized on the computer. The program describing the processing contents can be recorded on a computer-readable recording medium. Examples of the computer-readable recording medium include a magnetic recording device, an optical disk, a magneto-optical recording medium, and a semiconductor memory. Examples of the magnetic recording device include a hard disk device (HDD), a flexible disk (FD), and a magnetic tape. Examples of the optical disc include a DVD (Digital Versatile Disc), a DVD-RAM (Random Access Memory), a CD-ROM (Compact Disc Read Only Memory), and a CD-R (Recordable) / RW (ReWritable). Examples of the magneto-optical recording medium include MO (Magneto-Optical disk).

  When distributing the program, for example, a portable recording medium such as a DVD or a CD-ROM in which the program is recorded is sold. It is also possible to store the program in a storage device of a server computer and transfer the program from the server computer to another computer via a network.

  The computer executing the patent search program stores, for example, a program recorded on a portable recording medium or a program transferred from a server computer in its own storage device. Then, the computer reads the program from its own storage device and executes processing according to the program. The computer can also read the program directly from the portable recording medium and execute processing according to the program. In addition, each time the program is transferred from the server computer, the computer can sequentially execute processing according to the received program.

It is a figure which shows the hardware structural example of a patent search apparatus. It is a block diagram which shows the function of a patent search apparatus. It is a figure which shows the information stored in the maker information storage part. It is a flowchart which shows the process of the investigation maker judgment part. It is a flowchart which shows an intellectual property strategy investigation process. It is a flowchart which shows a narrowing-down process. It is a figure which shows a patent search screen. It is a figure which shows an output result screen. It is a figure which shows a graph. It is a figure which shows an example of a patent gazette. It is a graph which shows the result of having performed the intellectual property strategy investigation process in the peak year of each maker. It is a figure which shows the result of an intellectual property strategy investigation process.

Explanation of symbols

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 11 Monitor 11a Patent search screen 11b Output result screen 11c Graph display screen 20 Database 50 Patent gazette 100 Patent research apparatus 110 Manufacturer information storage part 110a Manufacturer information table 111 Applicant selection part 112 Search button 113 Search number display part 114 Download button 115 Output Result table 116 Graph button 117, 118 button 120 Survey target manufacturer judgment unit 130 Control unit 140 Display unit

Claims (7)

A computer that has access to a patent database that stores patent information and a table storing applicant information to be searched,
Search the patent database and extract the ratio of applicants stored in the table to the total number of applications in a predetermined category specified in advance,
Based on the extraction result, the aggressiveness of the IP strategy of the applicant stored in the table is determined.
Patent search method characterized by this.   2. The patent search method according to claim 1, wherein the determination result is displayed on a display means.   The patent search method according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined category is the number of divisional applications or continuation patent applications in the patent application of the patent publication.   The computer searches the number of applicants' applications stored in the table from a patent database, and extracts a category of an invention for an applicant whose registration number based on the search result is a predetermined value or more. Item 1. The patent search method according to Item 1.   The computer searches the patent database for the number of applicants' applications stored in the table, extracts the change in the number of registered applicants for each year, and determines whether the number of registered applicants has increased. The patent search method according to claim 1, wherein a category is extracted. A patent search apparatus capable of accessing a table storing applicant information to be searched and a patent database storing patent gazette information,
Means for searching the patent database and extracting a ratio of applicants stored in the table with respect to the total number of applications in a predetermined category specified in advance;
Based on the extraction result, a determination means for determining the aggressiveness of the applicant's intellectual property strategy stored in the table;
A patent search device characterized by comprising: To the computer that can access the patent database that stores the table of patent applicant information and the table that stores the applicant information to be investigated,
Search the patent database and extract the ratio of applicants stored in the table to the total number of applications in a predetermined category specified in advance,
Based on the extraction result, the aggressiveness of the applicant's intellectual property strategy stored in the table is determined,
Patent search program characterized by

Images