Before you pitch, demo, post or sell: How tech companies lose patent rights (and how to avoid it)

The fastest way for a technology company to damage its patent position is often not a lawsuit or a competitor filing first. It is talking about the invention too soon.

A demo, a deck, a launch video, a preorder page; any of these can create a patent problem before anyone thinks to call it one. Technology businesses are under constant pressure to demonstrate, publish, partner and commercialise. That can be good business strategy. But the sequencing matters: disclosure or commercialisation before filing can narrow, and in some countries, eliminate patent options.

The practical rule is simple: if the technology may be worth patenting, understand what you are about to disclose and file what matters before you disclose it.

How the disclosure clock works

To get a patent, an invention must be new. Once the public can learn about your invention, it is no longer new, and that includes disclosures you made yourself. Patent systems handle this in two very different ways.

The United States gives you a one-year grace period. If you, the inventor, publicly disclose your invention, you generally have 12 months to file a patent application. Miss that window and your own disclosure becomes prior art against you. Treat the grace period as a safety net, not a strategy: it is narrower than founders assume, and others who publish similar work during that year can still complicate your position.

Canada also gives you a one-year grace period, with a catch. Disclosures made by you, or by someone who learned of the invention from you, are excused if they happened within 12 months before your filing date. That window is measured back from your actual Canadian filing date (or your PCT international filing date), not from an earlier priority filing elsewhere. So plan your Canadian or PCT filing within a year of your first disclosure, not just your first filing. A founder who demos in March and relies on a US provisional filed later can still run out the Canadian clock.

Most of the rest of the world requires absolute novelty. Under the European Patent Convention, almost any public disclosure before your filing date destroys patentability, with only very narrow exceptions. China offers only a limited grace period for specific situations, such as certain government-recognized exhibitions. A handful of countries do offer a 12-month grace period, but the conditions differ in ways that matter.

Countries with a 12-month grace period

Country	Whose disclosures are covered	Clock measured back from	Formal requirements
Canada	The applicant, or anyone who obtained the invention from the applicant	Actual Canadian filing date (or PCT international filing date), not a priority date	No declaration required
United States	The inventor, or anyone who obtained the invention from the inventor	Effective filing date, including a provisional or foreign priority date	No declaration at filing; you may need to prove the disclosure was yours during examination
Japan	The person entitled to the patent, or a disclosure made against their will	Japanese filing date (or PCT international filing date)	Written claim at filing and proof within 30 days, except for disclosures against the applicant's will
South Korea	The person entitled to the patent, or a disclosure made against their will	Korean filing date (or PCT international filing date)	Claim and supporting evidence required within set deadlines
Australia	The patentee or a predecessor, or anyone who obtained the invention from them	Filing date of the Australian complete application	No declaration required
Brazil	The inventor, a third party using the inventor's information, or a premature publication by the patent office	Filing date or priority date	No declaration at filing; proof may be requested
Mexico	The inventor or their successor in title	Filing date or recognized priority date	Supporting evidence filed with the application

Even in grace-period countries, relying on the grace period is a fallback, not a plan, and the rules change. Confirm current requirements before you depend on one.

The filing-date trap

Consider a company that follows an entirely sensible filing schedule:

• March 1, 2026: The company publicly demonstrates the invention.
• Aug. 1, 2026: It files a US provisional application.
• Aug. 1, 2027: It files a PCT application claiming priority to the provisional.

The issue: The PCT filing is within 12 months of the provisional - but 17 months after the public disclosure. That can create a serious grace-period problem in jurisdictions that measure from the filing date.

The lesson: After a disclosure, do not calendar only the provisional deadline. Calendar the disclosure date.

The practical takeaway is simple. If you might ever want patent protection outside your home market, treat your first public disclosure as the deadline.

Selling can matter too. In some jurisdictions, an offer for sale can trigger a patent bar even where the details of the invention are not publicly revealed. Preorders, pilot contracts, paid beta programs and other commercial arrangements therefore deserve review before they begin. Elsewhere, the analysis can differ, including whether the activity made the invention available to the public. The point is not that every pilot or sale destroys rights; it is that commercialisation should be part of the pre-filing review.

Eight routine activities that can create patent problems

Most harmful disclosures are not dramatic. They are routine business activities that nobody flagged as legally significant.

1. External presentations without an NDA: Investor decks are one example, but the same issue arises with customer presentations, partner discussions, procurement materials and other non-confidential communications. Material that explains the technical solution rather than merely the business problem can create disclosure risk.
2. Demo days and conferences: A stage presentation, working prototype, booth demonstration, poster or technical handout can make relevant features public.
3. Crowdfunding and preorders: Campaign pages are designed to explain the product publicly and may also involve offers for sale.
4. Launch videos, blogs and social media: A company post, technical article or video explaining "how we built it" can reveal exactly the feature a later patent application needs to distinguish.
5. Papers, theses and posters: Academic publication timelines often move independently of patent timelines. An abstract, thesis deposit or conference presentation can matter.
6. Open-source releases: Publishing code in a public repository can disclose an implementation before the patent filing catches up.
7. Pilots and early commercial activity: Customer pilots, paid betas and early sales can raise both disclosure and commercialisation issues, depending on the country and the arrangement.
8. Consumer AI tools: Entering unpublished invention details into a generative-AI service can create confidentiality, data-use, privilege, trade-secret and potentially patent-related risks, depending on the service terms and how the information is handled. Before filing, understand whether prompts are retained, used for training, accessible to third parties or otherwise protected. Enterprise systems with appropriate contractual confidentiality and data controls present a different risk profile.

None of these activities is inherently a mistake. They are normal parts of developing and commercialising technology. The recurring problem is sequencing: the business moves first and the patent filing catches up later.

Why investors, partners and acquirers care

For many technology businesses—particularly hardware, medtech, climate tech, biotech, advanced manufacturing, and software—patents can be strategically important. During financing, partnership, licensing or acquisition diligence, counsel may ask for a timeline of inventions, filings, ownership and public disclosures.

Patent mistakes can surface during diligence, restrict the geographic scope of protection available to the business, complicate licensing or partnership discussions, and weaken its negotiating position. A clean record - filings made before key disclosures, clear ownership and an intentional international strategy -tells a different story: the organisation understands its technology as an asset and manages it accordingly.

The protection playbook

File before the public moment. If a pitch, demo, paper, launch, crowdfunding campaign or sale is approaching, build the patent decision into that calendar. In the US that often means a provisional application: a lower-cost filing that secures a priority date for 12 months while you prepare the full application. Filing something substantive before disclosure is usually cleaner than trying to reconstruct grace-period rights later.

Do not confuse “we filed” with “we are covered.” A provisional application only supports what it adequately describes. A thin filing or an application directed to an earlier product version may not protect the improvement being shown next month.

Canadian founders: there is no provisional in Canada. The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) has no provisional filing. Many Canadian startups file a US provisional first to lock in a priority date cheaply, then file in Canada or under the PCT within 12 months. Another route is to file a regular Canadian application early and claim its priority in later filings. Canada also lets you defer requesting examination for up to four years after filing, which spreads costs out while you raise capital.

Make early filings substantive. Include the technical architecture, alternatives, drawings, implementation details and variations that may matter commercially. The goal is not merely to obtain a filing receipt; it is to establish useful support for later claims.

Use confidentiality deliberately. NDAs can be effective with manufacturers, development partners, prospective licensees and others willing to sign them. Investors often will not. Where confidentiality is unavailable, control the technical content or file first.

Lock down ownership. Employees, founders where applicable, contractors and other contributors to inventions should have appropriate IP agreements. University spinouts should check the institution's policy and any sponsored-research obligations. Collaborative development arrangements should also address ownership. These issues are much easier to solve before diligence or a dispute.

File in layers as the technology evolves. R&D teams may develop important improvements after the first filing. Additional filings can capture those improvements before they are disclosed, with the filing strategy consolidated later where appropriate.

Use the funding and fee breaks available to you. Both the USPTO and CIPO offer reduced fees for small entities, and the US has deeper discounts for qualifying micro entities. Canadian startups can also tap public programs that help pay for IP strategy and filings. Federally, NRC IRAP's IP Assist and the ElevateIP accelerator program have renewed funding running from 2026–27 through 2029–30.

Check provincial programs too. In Ontario, Intellectual Property Ontario (IPON) helps small and medium-sized businesses develop, protect, and commercialize their IP through advisory services, education, and funding. IPON typically covers about 80% of approved costs, up to a lifetime cap of $300,000, and applications now run through its online portal. Funding is not retroactive and must be spent through an IPON-approved service provider, so apply before the work begins. Other provinces offer their own regional programs, so ask a patent agent what's available where your company operates.

Already disclosed? What to do now

If you've already demoed, posted, published, or sold, don't panic, and don't wait. Your options depend on timing, so act quickly.

1. Find the earliest relevant date. Collect pitch decks and send dates, event dates, publications, repository commits, videos, customer proposals, preorder pages and sale or pilot documentation.
2. Preserve the evidence. Keep copies of what was actually shown or sent. The content of the disclosure can matter as much as the date.
3. Assess what was actually disclosed. A video showing what a product does may not reveal how it works. Improvements and features you haven't shown publicly may still be fully patentable worldwide.
4. Check country-specific grace periods. A few jurisdictions offer limited relief, often with strict paperwork deadlines. These are worth reviewing before writing off international protection.
5. Get the filing analysis done quickly. Where a grace period is running, delay consumes options. The objective is to determine what can still be protected and file it before another deadline or disclosure intervenes.

The worst move is assuming it's too late and doing nothing. A short conversation with a patent agent can often salvage meaningful protection.

Your pre-disclosure checklist

Run through this list before any pitch, demo, launch, publication, or sale:

• Have we identified what is new about our technology, including features we haven't built yet?
• Is there a patent application on file that actually describes those features?
• Do we know whether we want protection beyond our home market, whether that's the US or Canada?
• Does this deck, demo, post or paper explain how the technology works rather than only what it does?
• Is confidentiality in place where it is realistic and appropriate?
• Could the activity involve an offer for sale, paid pilot or other commercial use?
• Have employees, founders where applicable, contractors and other contributors appropriately assigned relevant IP?
• Are both the filing deadline and any earlier disclosure date on the company calendar?
• Have we kept invention details out of AI tools that lack confidentiality terms?

File first. Talk second.

Technology companies need to move quickly: demonstrate to customers, work with partners, publish research, pursue investment and launch products. Patent strategy should enable that activity, not obstruct it. The key is to put the filing decision before the public or commercial event rather than after it.

A disclosure shouldn’t become a patent deadline by accident. Gowling WLG works with technology companies—from emerging businesses to established organisations—to review upcoming disclosures, identify what is worth protecting, prepare substantive patent filings on accelerated timelines where necessary, and coordinate international filing strategies with R&D, commercialisation, partnership and financing plans. If a disclosure has already occurred, an early review can help determine what options remain and what should be filed next.

If you have any questions, please contact the author or a member of our Intellectual Property and Patent teams.