(Translated with ChatGPT without further editing)
Scalable IP supports start-ups, scale-ups, and SMEs in securing their innovations through clear IP strategies and making them economically viable. This involves not only patents and trademarks, but also trade secrets and even defensive publications. In this interview with Dr. Tilman Breitenstein – formerly a senior executive in the patent and IP departments of companies such as BASF and DSM – we explore how to think strategically about intellectual property, avoid common mistakes, and maximize the value of IP in the innovation process.
Dr. Breitenstein, thank you very much for taking the time for this interview. To start, what exactly do you do today with Scalable IP, and how does your work differ – especially compared to your previous roles in industry and corporate environments – from traditional patent attorney work?
I see myself as an enabler – through my work with start-ups, my teaching at the university, and my support through seminars and coaching for industry associations such as here at ChemieCluster. My focus lies in connecting business strategy – questions like “how do you want to be successful?” or “why is a customer willing to pay for your product?” – with IP strategy, meaning “what kind of IP do you need to support your business strategy, and what not?”
I often work with visual tools such as the Osterwalder Canvas to make an IP strategy tangible and actionable. When a company decides to file patents, I help them find a specialized patent attorney. I no longer write patent applications myself – each technology is different, details are decisive, and no one can truly cover the entire chemical sector anymore.
Many start-ups – especially in high-tech or chemical industries – underestimate IP. What are some typical mistakes or blind spots you see in young companies when it comes to patents or protecting know-how?
I often observe that start-ups begin to think about IP too late. Too often they say, “let’s just wait for the next funding round,” “let’s finish this test series,” or “let’s build one more prototype.” By doing so, they lose valuable lead time – because the competition doesn’t sleep. You don’t need a prototype to file a patent. You need to be able to describe a workable invention, and that is usually possible much earlier.
I call this the expert trap: the standard for patentability is not what creative minds in a specialist field can come up with among themselves, but rather what would be considered inventive to an average, uncreative professional in that field.
Could you share an example from your work where a well-thought-out IP concept made a difference — for instance, helped secure funding, achieve competitive advantages, or deter imitators?
I’m thinking of a medium-sized company that was already successful with its materials and wanted to move up the value chain by introducing a radically new application. Before making this new application public through marketing, we conducted an intensive workshop to explore all possible protection options — not only involving R&D researchers, but also marketing and sales, production, and IT.
This allowed us to protect the new application through a whole range of patent and design filings across multiple dimensions — for example, the product itself, its manufacturing process, its applications, and even the related software. I call this an IP harvesting workshop. When the company finally launched the new product line publicly, it was already protected against imitation in many ways.
If you had to give three key recommendations on IP to an innovative chemical start-up or technology-driven SME today, what would they be?
First, increase your own IP literacy. There are plenty of opportunities for that at universities or in associations such as ChemieCluster. In my over 25 years in IP, I’ve heard too often the sentence: “I didn’t think that could be patented.” That’s always unfortunate when competitors were smarter and filed something that your team had already invented earlier.
Second, coming back to question 2, start early and take small steps. File your first patent application, learn through the process, and then write the next one even better — instead of waiting for the one perfect, world-changing filing. Many major inventions are incremental improvements.
Starting early is also important when looking for partners — for example, for collaborations or licensing negotiations. On the side of large corporations, these negotiations can take a long time due to internal approval processes, so a start-up might run out of funding in the meantime. Prepare your licensing package early!
Third, approach IP management in terms of risk and opportunity. Your own IP is an opportunity — file it quickly when it arises, but also be ready to drop it quickly if the technology doesn’t prove itself. That’s how you keep costs under control.
On the risk side, try to quantify risks from third-party IP: which risks can you afford, and which ones could break your neck? Work through those risks in that order.
Dr. Breitenstein holds a PhD in organic chemistry and began his training as a patent attorney immediately afterward. His career has taken him from Japan to Germany, then on to the United States, the Netherlands, and Belgium, where he worked for three highly successful multinational corporations. As a senior executive, he also had the opportunity to deepen his understanding of business and economics at the IMD Business School in Switzerland. What he has always enjoyed most, however, is strategic consulting — which ultimately led him to start his own company with that focus.
