Patents: from defensive obligation to strategic lever
- Business Science Institute
- Sep 10
- 3 min read
Updated: Sep 11
Pascal Corbel*
Professor
Paris-Saclay University, RITM
*Member of the faculty of the Executive DBA Paris-Saclay / Business Science Institute
The world of patents can be dizzying. Between the technical jargon, international procedures, and the amounts involved, it sometimes seems reserved for a handful of specialists. It is difficult for a CEO or manager to find their place in this world of claims, PCTs, thickets, pools, and even trolls. The costs are tangible, but the benefits remain unclear. So we file, because others are filing. Without really believing in it.
And yet, certain figures challenge these perceptions. When Technicolor rakes in more than €400 million in annual royalties, or when a group of major players shells out $4.5 billion to get their hands on Nortel's patents, it becomes difficult to continue to view patents as a mere cost or legal formality. These are extreme cases, of course, but they point to the existence of a very real strategic issue.
Patents as a wall or a marketable asset
In some companies, patents play an obvious defensive role. This is particularly true of pharmaceutical companies and technology companies that are highly innovation-intensive. The aim is to build a veritable legal wall around products, through broad, international coverage and the ability to quickly detect counterfeits. This requires significant resources, dedicated teams, and governance that is integrated into the company's strategy.
But other companies, sometimes in the same sectors, take a completely different approach. They do not produce anything themselves. They live off the royalties paid by those who exploit the inventions. The patent then becomes a marketable asset. The objective is no longer to prevent imitation, but to monitor the markets in order to identify profitable uses... and then negotiate from a position of strength.
Preserving freedom of action
Many companies do not place technology at the heart of their competitive advantage. This does not make patents useless, quite the contrary. They can be used to preserve freedom of exploitation in an uncertain environment. The simple fact of holding a substantial portfolio can deter attacks or enable cross-licensing agreements.
From this perspective, the priority is not necessarily international expansion or active defense. It is about occupying the field, reducing competitors' room for maneuver, and remaining in a position to negotiate. The strategic function exists, but it is exercised differently, with appropriate budgetary trade-offs and a more indirect link to high-level decisions. Hence the importance, nevertheless, of linking industrial property strategies to internationalization strategies.
An identity marker for start-ups
Other functions of patents are often underestimated. They can send a strong signal of competence to industrial partners, reassure investors, or reinforce the image of an innovative company. In the case of a start-up, this role can be decisive in reaching certain stages of development. The patent then acts as proof of seriousness, technical soundness, and to watch strategic ambition.
Ultimately, it is not so much the patent itself that is decisive as the way it fits into the overall vision. By definition, a tool is only as good as the use made of it. And in an economy based on intelligence, ideas, networks, and differentiation, it would be a shame to underutilize such a powerful lever.
Two worlds to connect
Even today, industrial property and strategy are too often confined to two separate spheres of the company. One is the domain of lawyers and engineers, the other of executives and business developers. It is this boundary that must be broken down. A patent is not simply a legal document. It is a strategic choice, sometimes a fundamental one. And it is in every manager's interest to take advantage of it.
Discover Professor Pascal Corbel's publications at:
