Computer program, device, patent evaluation method, and selection method of target enterprise of investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, and merger

Abstract

The present invention acquires information associated with intellectual property competitiveness of an enterprise or the like from patent bulletins and the like. A computer program of the present invention collects at least one of the total number of claims, the total number of claim categories, the total number of independent claims, the total number of dependent claims, the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim category, the total number of claims in a claim category identical to or associated with a specified designated good or specified service, the total number of independent claims in a claim category identical to or associated with a specified designated good or specified service, and the total number of dependent claims in a claim category identical to or associated with a specified designated good or specified service from the claim of each of a plurality of patent bulletins or a plurality of published patent bulletins.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] Some embodiments of the present invention relate to determination methods, evaluation methods, computer programs, systems, servers, or computers and other devices. Background Technology

[0002] In due diligence, such as selecting target companies for financing, investment, stock or bond transactions, creating investment portfolios, mergers and acquisitions, or listing, patent-related information is extremely important in evaluating the target company's technological strength or technological assets. However, there are currently almost no objective indicators that indicate a high probability of success in patent litigation or that the target company's business expansion or maintenance is conducive to its success, so we have to rely on subjective human evaluation.

[0003] Existing technical documents

[0004] Patent documents

[0005] Patent Document 1: Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 2021-086238

[0006] Patent Document 2: Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 2020-166902 Summary of the Invention

[0007] One objective of some embodiments of the present invention is to provide an objective indicator of patent competitiveness. Furthermore, one objective of some embodiments of the present invention is to provide a method for evaluating intellectual property rights, a method for determining intellectual property competitiveness, and an efficient method for selecting target companies for investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or mergers and acquisitions.

[0008] In some embodiments of the present invention, a computer program performs a first collection step. In this first collection step, for multiple electronically digitized patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple publicly available patent gazettes, at least one of multiple first parameters is collected. These multiple first parameters include: the total number of claims related to the claims of each of the multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple publicly available patent gazettes; the total number of claim classes; the total number of independent claims; the total number of dependent claims; the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class; the total number of claims in claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service; the total number of independent claims in claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service; and the total number of dependent claims in claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service. It should be noted that in some embodiments of the present invention, patent gazettes, published patent gazettes, and publicly available patent gazettes are not limited to gazettes published by the Japan Patent Office, but can also be gazettes published by patent offices of major countries such as the United States, China, South Korea, and European countries, as well as other countries.

[0009] In the aforementioned computer program, the specified service may include, for example, service items, business models, and operations.

[0010] The computer program described above can achieve the following effects, for example: it can quickly collect information related to the validity of patent rights, such as patent competitiveness or robustness in response to invalidation requests or invalidation.

[0011] In the above computer program, it is preferable to further implement a determining step, in which the applicant or patentee of each of the plurality of patent gazettes, the published patent gazettes or the published patent gazettes is determined.

[0012] The aforementioned computer program identifies the applicant or patentee, providing information related to the validity of the patent right, such as patent competitiveness or robustness, and information about the connection between the applicant or patentee. Therefore, this computer program can, for example, be helpful in identifying patents or patent applications that form the basis of a business transaction, or in selecting patents or patent applications to present to the accused infringer or negotiating partner during patent litigation or licensing negotiations. Furthermore, it can also be used as an indicator of the quality of patent practice, for example, from the perspective of the original purpose of obtaining a patent, namely, obtaining exclusive rights, and from the perspective of the resilience against patent invalidity that is a prerequisite for exercising rights.

[0013] Information related to the validity of patent rights, such as patent competitiveness or robustness, and information about the relationship between the applicant or patentee, which can be obtained through the aforementioned computer programs, can be one of the important pieces of information in due diligence processes such as investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, mergers and acquisitions, and listing.

[0014] In the above computer program, it is preferable to further implement a first extraction step, in which the multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes or multiple published patent gazettes are extracted from the multiple patent gazettes, the multiple published patent gazettes or the multiple published patent gazettes that correspond to multiple patent applications of the applicant or patentee who are designated as the subject of investigation enterprises, individuals or institutions.

[0015] At least one of the multiple first parameters obtained through the aforementioned computer program, relative to multiple patent applications from companies, individuals, or organizations designated as the subjects of investigation (the applicant or patentee), can be used as a benchmark for other companies, individuals, or organizations. By setting the applicant or patentee used as the benchmark as, for example, a competitor company in the company's goods, services, or business, the patent strength of that competitor company in that goods or services can be evaluated against that company's.

[0016] In the above computer program, a second collection step is preferably implemented, in which the number of cited documents is collected as a second parameter for the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes or the plurality of published patent gazettes. The number of cited documents is the number of prior art documents cited by the patent office in the examination of the plurality of patent applications corresponding to the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes or the plurality of published patent gazettes.

[0017] In the aforementioned computer program, the number of references cited by the examiner during examination can be obtained, for example, by counting the references in the Japanese Patent Publication. Furthermore, in the US Patent Publication, the number of references cited by the examiner during examination can be obtained, for example, by counting the references marked with an asterisk (*) indicating that they were cited by the examiner.

[0018] Since cited references can be an obstacle for an applicant in obtaining a patent, the number of cited references can be considered to correspond to the degree of obstacle or restriction for the applicant in obtaining patent rights.

[0019] In the aforementioned computer program, it is preferable to further implement a designated step in which the designated goods or services are specified based on the enterprise, individual or organization being investigated, or the goods being manufactured or sold, or the business or services being implemented by the enterprise, individual or organization being investigated.

[0020] In the aforementioned computer program, a selection step is preferably further implemented, in which the designated goods or services are selected based on the survey results from an electronic database or the Internet regarding the enterprises, individuals, or organizations being surveyed, or the goods being manufactured or sold or the services being provided by the enterprises, individuals, or organizations being surveyed.

[0021] In the aforementioned computer program, a first calculation step is preferably further implemented, in which a significance probability is calculated as a third parameter based on the correlation between the second parameter and the value of the at least one first parameter. For example, if the at least one first parameter is a parameter related to the number of independent claims (e.g., the total number of independent claims, the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class, the total number of independent claims in the same or related claim class as the specified goods, technology, or service, etc.), it can be considered that the strength of the correlation with the second parameter corresponds to the result or attempt by the applicant or patentee to maximize the scope of patent rights relative to the cited documents, which are obstacles or limitations in obtaining a patent.

[0022] For example, if the first parameter is a parameter related to the number of dependent claims (e.g., the total number of dependent claims, the total number of dependent claims of the same or related claim class as the specified goods, specified technology or specified service, etc.), it can be considered that the strength of the relevance to the second parameter corresponds to the result of the applicant or patentee's resistance to invalidation requests or invalidation or attempts to do so relative to the cited documents, which are obstacles or limitations in obtaining a patent.

[0023] In the aforementioned computer program, a second calculation step is preferably further implemented, in which a correlation coefficient is calculated as a fourth parameter based on the correlation between the values ​​of the second parameter and the at least one first parameter. This correlation coefficient can, for example, serve as an indicator of the applicant's or patentee's efforts to maximize the scope of patent rights relative to cited documents—an obstacle or limitation in obtaining a patent—or to ensure resilience against invalidation requests or invalidation, or to their efforts in relation to cited documents—an obstacle or limitation in obtaining a patent.

[0024] In the aforementioned computer program, a third calculation step is preferably further implemented, in which the ratio of the second parameter to the at least one first parameter is calculated as a fifth parameter. This ratio can, for example, serve as an indicator of the applicant's or patentee's efforts to maximize the scope of patent rights relative to cited documents—an obstacle or limitation in obtaining a patent—or to ensure resilience against invalidation requests or invalidation, or to their efforts in relation to cited documents—an obstacle or limitation in obtaining a patent.

[0025] In the aforementioned computer program, preferably, the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes include at least a plurality of first patent gazettes, a plurality of first published patent gazettes, or a plurality of first published patent gazettes belonging to a first group, and a plurality of second patent gazettes, a plurality of second published patent gazettes, or a plurality of second published patent gazettes belonging to a second group. The computer program further implements a first verification step, in which a significant difference test is performed on the difference between the at least one first parameter in the first group and the second group.

[0026] In the aforementioned computer program, preferably, the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes include at least a plurality of first patent gazettes, a plurality of first published patent gazettes, or a plurality of first published patent gazettes belonging to a first group, and a plurality of second patent gazettes, a plurality of second published patent gazettes, or a plurality of second published patent gazettes belonging to a second group. The computer program further implements a second verification step, in which a significant difference test is performed on the difference between the second parameter in the first group and the second group.

[0027] In the aforementioned computer program, preferably, the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes include at least a plurality of first patent gazettes, a plurality of first published patent gazettes, or a plurality of first published patent gazettes belonging to a first group, and a plurality of second patent gazettes, a plurality of second published patent gazettes, or a plurality of second published patent gazettes belonging to a second group. The computer program further implements a third verification step, in which a significant difference test is performed on the difference between the third parameter in the first group and the second group.

[0028] In the aforementioned computer program, preferably, the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes include at least a plurality of first patent gazettes, a plurality of first published patent gazettes, or a plurality of first published patent gazettes belonging to the first group, and a plurality of second patent gazettes, a plurality of second published patent gazettes, or a plurality of second published patent gazettes belonging to the second group. The computer program further implements a fourth verification step, in which a significant difference test is performed on the difference between the fourth parameter in the first group and the second group.

[0029] In the aforementioned computer program, preferably, the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes include at least a plurality of first patent gazettes, a plurality of first published patent gazettes, or a plurality of first published patent gazettes belonging to the first group, and a plurality of second patent gazettes, a plurality of second published patent gazettes, or a plurality of second published patent gazettes belonging to the second group. The computer program further implements a fifth verification step, in which a significant difference test is performed on the difference between the fifth parameter in the first group and the second group.

[0030] In the aforementioned computer program, for example, the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of first public patent publications belonging to the first group may be publications of the first applicant or the first patentee, and the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second public patent publications belonging to the second group may be publications of the second applicant or the second patentee. In this case, the differences based on at least one parameter of the applicant or the patentee can be quantitatively investigated.

[0031] In the aforementioned computer program, for example, the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of first public patent publications belonging to the first group may be publications related to the first product, the first service, or the first service item, and the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second public patent publications belonging to the second group may be publications related to the second product, the second service, or the second service item. In this case, the differences based on the at least one parameter of the product, service, or service item can be quantitatively investigated.

[0032] In the aforementioned computer program, for example, the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosure patent publications, or the plurality of first public patent publications belonging to the first group may be publications related to a period corresponding to the first stage in the product life cycle, and the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosure patent publications, or the plurality of second public patent publications belonging to the second group may be publications related to a period corresponding to the first stage in the product life cycle. In this case, the differences in at least one parameter based on the product life cycle can be quantitatively investigated.

[0033] In the above-mentioned computer program, a second extraction step is preferably included, in which the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of publicly available patent gazettes are extracted from the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of publicly available patent gazettes, or the plurality of publicly available patent gazettes that correspond to the object patent in the patent infringement lawsuit filed with the court or the invalidation request or opposition application submitted to the patent office.

[0034] In the aforementioned computer program, a third extraction step is preferably included, in which the target patent is extracted using an electronic database or the Internet, and multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple published patent gazettes corresponding to the target patent are extracted from the multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple published patent gazettes. The target patent is the patent that has become the subject of multiple patent infringement lawsuits filed in court or invalidation requests or opposition applications filed with the patent office.

[0035] The computer program described above preferably further includes the following steps: a fourth extraction step, extracting the applicants of the plurality of first patent gazettes, the plurality of first public patent gazettes, or the plurality of first public patent gazettes as first applicants or first patentees; and a fifth extraction step, extracting the applicants of the plurality of second patent gazettes, the plurality of second public patent gazettes, or the plurality of second public patent gazettes as second applicants.

[0036] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the first data collection step is stored.

[0037] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the determining step is stored.

[0038] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the first extraction step is stored.

[0039] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the second data collection step is stored.

[0040] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the specified step is stored.

[0041] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the selection step is stored.

[0042] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the first calculation step is stored.

[0043] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the second calculation step is stored.

[0044] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the third calculation step is stored.

[0045] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the first verification step is stored.

[0046] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the second verification step is stored.

[0047] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the third verification step is stored.

[0048] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the fourth verification step is stored.

[0049] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the fifth verification step is stored.

[0050] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the second extraction step is stored.

[0051] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the third extraction step is stored.

[0052] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the fourth extraction step is stored.

[0053] The computer program described above preferably further includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the fifth extraction step is stored.

[0054] In the above computer program, a storage step is preferably implemented, wherein the storage step stores at least a portion of the implementation process or result of at least one of the following steps: the first data collection step, the determining step, the first extraction step, the second data collection step, the specifying step, the selecting step, the first calculation step, the second calculation step, the third calculation step, the first verification step, the second verification step, the third verification step, the fourth verification step, the fifth verification step, the second extraction step, the third extraction step, the fourth extraction step, and the fifth extraction step.

[0055] In the above computer program, it is preferable to use at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the storage step as benchmark or reference data.

[0056] In the aforementioned computer program, it is preferable to use at least one first data obtained from the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of first public patent publications as a benchmark for analyzing or parsing at least one second data obtained from the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second public patent publications.

[0057] Some embodiments of the present invention involve a computer program that performs the following steps: Extracting multiple target patents using an electronic database or the Internet, wherein the multiple target patents are patents that are the subject of multiple patent infringement lawsuits filed in court or multiple invalidation requests or multiple opposition applications submitted to the patent office; determining multiple winning patents or multiple maintained patents and multiple failed patents or multiple invalid patents among the multiple target patents, wherein the multiple winning patents are the target patents in which the patentee wins in the multiple patent infringement lawsuits, the multiple maintained patents are the patents that are maintained in the multiple invalidation requests or multiple opposition applications, the multiple failed patents are the target patents in which the patentee loses in the multiple patent infringement lawsuits, and the multiple invalid patents are the patents that are not maintained in the multiple invalidation requests or multiple opposition applications; extracting multiple first patent gazettes, multiple first publication patent gazettes, or multiple first public patent gazettes corresponding to the multiple winning patents or the multiple maintained patents; extracting multiple failed patents... Or, multiple second patent gazettes, multiple second-published patent gazettes, or multiple second-published patent gazettes corresponding to the multiple maintained patents; collect at least one of multiple first parameters, or collect the number of cited documents as a second parameter, wherein the multiple first parameters include: the total number of claims related to the claims of the multiple first patent gazettes, multiple first-published patent gazettes, or multiple first-published patent gazettes; the total number of claim categories; the total number of independent claims; the total number of dependent claims; the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim category; the total number of claims of claim categories that are the same as or associated with the specified specified goods, specified technology, or specified service; the total number of independent claims of claim categories that are the same as or associated with the specified specified goods, specified technology, or specified service; and the total number of dependent claims of claim categories that are the same as or associated with the specified specified goods, specified technology, or specified service. The number of cited documents is the number of prior art documents cited by the patent office in the examination of the patent applications for the multiple first patent gazettes, multiple first-published patent gazettes, or multiple first-published patent gazettes; collect the at least one first parameter or the second parameter for the multiple second patent gazettes, multiple second-published patent gazettes, or multiple second-published patent gazettes.

[0058] The aforementioned computer program, for example, can quickly investigate the characteristics of patents that have won patent infringement lawsuits and those that are patient with invalidation requests.

[0059] In the above computer program, preferably, for the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications or the plurality of first public patent publications, and the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications or the plurality of second public patent publications, the significance probability of the correlation between the second parameter and the at least one first parameter is calculated as the third parameter.

[0060] In the above computer program, preferably, for the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first-published patent publications or the plurality of first-publication patent publications, and the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second-published patent publications or the plurality of second-publication patent publications, the correlation coefficient between the value of the second parameter and the value of the at least one first parameter is calculated as the fourth parameter.

[0061] In the above computer program, it is preferable to perform a significant difference test between the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first-published patent publications, or the plurality of first-table patent publications and the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second-published patent publications, or the plurality of second-table patent publications for the at least one first parameter or the second parameter.

[0062] In the above computer program, the following steps are preferably further implemented: for the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications or the plurality of first public patent publications, and the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications or the plurality of second public patent publications, the ratio of the second parameter to the at least one first parameter is calculated as a fifth parameter; for the fifth parameter, a significant difference test is performed between the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications or the plurality of first public patent publications and the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications or the plurality of second public patent publications.

[0063] Some embodiments of the present invention involve a computer program comprising the following steps: A first step, for multiple first patent publications, multiple first-published patent publications, or multiple first-table patent publications digitized electronically by the first applicant or the first patentee, collecting the value of a first parameter, wherein the first parameter is selected from the total number of claims, the total number of independent claims, the total number of dependent claims, the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class, the total number of independent claims in claim classes identical or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, the total number of independent claims in claim classes identical or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, and the number of dependent claims in claim classes identical or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service. The first step involves collecting the value of a second parameter for each of the multiple second patent publications, multiple second-published patent publications, or multiple second-table patent publications digitized by the second applicant or the second patentee. The second parameter is at least one of the following parameters: the total number of claims, the total number of independent claims, the total number of dependent claims, the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class, the total number of claims in claim classes identical or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, the total number of independent claims in claim classes identical or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, and the total number of dependent claims in claim classes identical or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service.

[0064] In the above computer program, a third step is preferably included, in which a significant difference test is performed on the difference between the value of the first parameter collected in the first step and the value of the second parameter collected in the second step.

[0065] In the above computer program, preferably, when the first parameter is the total number of claims in the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of first published patent publications, the second parameter is the total number of claims in the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second published patent publications; and when the first parameter is the total number of claim categories in the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of first published patent publications, the second parameter is the total number of claim categories in the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second published patent publications. When the first parameter is the total number of independent claims in the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of first published patent publications, the second parameter is the total number of independent claims in the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second published patent publications; when the first parameter is the total number of dependent claims in the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of first published patent publications, the second parameter is the total number of dependent claims in the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second published patent publications; when the first parameter is the total number of independent ... independent claims in the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second published patent publications. When the first parameter is the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim category of a plurality of first patent publications, plurality of first-published patent publications, or plurality of first-table patent publications, the second parameter is the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim category of the plurality of second patent publications, plurality of second-published patent publications, or plurality of second-table patent publications; when the first parameter is the total number of claims in the plurality of first patent publications, plurality of first-published patent publications, or plurality of first-table patent publications that are identical to or associated with the specified specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, the second parameter is the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim category of the plurality of second patent publications, plurality of first-published patent publications, or plurality of first-table patent publications. The total number of claims in the second patent publication or the plurality of second patent publications that are identical or associated with the specified goods, specified technology or specified service; when the first parameter is the total number of claims in the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first patent publications or the plurality of first patent publications that are identical or associated with the specified goods, specified technology or specified service, the second parameter is the total number of claims in the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second patent publications or the plurality of second patent publications that are identical or associated with the specified goods, specified technology or specified service;When the first parameter is the total number of dependent claims in the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of first public patent publications that are identical to or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, the second parameter is the total number of dependent claims in the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second public patent publications that are identical to or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service.

[0066] Some embodiments of the present invention involve a computer program comprising the following steps: A first step, determining, through an electronically digitized first database or internet search, a first enterprise, first person, or first institution selling or manufacturing designated goods or implementing designated services specified by the user, and the market share of the first enterprise, first person, or first institution; a second step, retrieving, through an electronically digitized second database or internet search, multiple first patent gazettes, multiple first-published patent gazettes, or multiple first-published patent gazettes, wherein the multiple first patent gazettes, multiple first-published patent gazettes, or multiple first-published patent gazettes list the first enterprise, first person, or first institution as the first applicant or patentee, and the claims include claims having the same or related claim categories as the designated goods or the designated services. The third step involves collecting, for each of the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first published patent publications, or the plurality of first public patent publications extracted through the second step, the value of at least one of the following parameters: total number of claims, total number of claim classes, total number of independent claims, total number of dependent claims, maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class, total number of claims in claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified technology or specified service, total number of independent claims in claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, and total number of dependent claims in claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service.

[0067] The computer program described above preferably further includes the following steps: a fourth step, determining the market share of a second enterprise, second person, or second institution that sells or manufactures the designated goods or implements the designated services, different from the first enterprise, first person, or first institution, through an electronically digitized third database or internet search; a fifth step, for the plurality of second patent gazettes or the plurality of second public patent gazettes extracted in the fourth step, collecting the values ​​of at least one parameter among the following: total number of claims, total number of claim categories, total number of independent claims, total number of dependent claims, maximum number of independent claims within the same claim category, total number of claims in claim categories that are the same as or related to the designated technology or designated service, total number of independent claims in claim categories that are the same as or related to the designated goods, designated technology, or designated service, and total number of dependent claims in claim categories that are the same as or related to the designated goods, designated technology, or designated service; and a sixth step, performing a significant difference test on the difference between the value of the at least one parameter collected in the third step and the value of the at least one parameter collected in the fifth step.

[0068] Some embodiments of the present invention involve a computer program that collects at least one of the total number of defining elements and the total number of designated phrases from the claims of multiple electronically digitized patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple publicly available patent gazettes. The total number of defining elements is the number of defining elements in the claims, and the total number of designated phrases is the number of designated phrases used to designate the defining elements that have appeared in the claims and to record the relationship between them and other defining elements.

[0069] When drafting claims, for example, when describing the relationship between limiting elements, a specified phrase is added before the existing limiting element to describe its relationship with the new limiting element. Therefore, the total number of limiting elements and the total number of specified phrases can become the basic indicators of the degree of understanding or practical accuracy of the invention. Thus, by using the above-mentioned computer program, the basic indicators of the degree of understanding or practical accuracy of the invention can be easily obtained.

[0070] In the above computer program, it is preferable to collect both the total number of the defined elements and the total number of the specified words and phrases.

[0071] In the above computer program, it is preferable to collect at least one of the total number of defining elements and the total number of specified terms for the independent claims of the claim.

[0072] Some embodiments of the present invention involve a computer program comprising the following steps: a first step of collecting at least one parameter from the claims of a plurality of first patent publications, a plurality of first published patent publications, or a plurality of first public patent publications digitized by a first applicant or a first patentee, wherein the total number of limiting elements is the number of limiting elements in the claims, and the total number of designated phrases is the number of designated phrases used to designate the limiting elements that have appeared in the claims and to record the relationship between them and other limiting elements; a second step of collecting at least one parameter from the claims of a plurality of second patent publications, a plurality of second published patent publications, or a plurality of second public patent publications digitized by a second applicant or a second patentee, wherein the total number of limiting elements is the number of limiting elements in the claims, and the total number of designated phrases is the number of designated phrases used to designate the limiting elements that have appeared in the claims and to record the relationship between them and other limiting elements; and a third step of performing a significant difference test on the difference between the value of the at least one parameter collected by the first step and the value of the at least one parameter collected by the second step.

[0073] In the above computer program, it is preferable to collect both the total number of the limiting elements and the total number of the specified words and phrases in the first step, and to collect both the total number of the limiting elements and the total number of the specified words and phrases in the second step.

[0074] In the above computer program, a fourth step is preferably included, in which a significant difference test is performed on the difference between the ratio of the number of defined elements to the number of specified words and sentences collected in the first step and the ratio of the number of defined elements to the number of specified words and sentences collected in the second step.

[0075] Some embodiments of the present invention involve a computer program comprising the following steps: an enterprise determination step, which identifies an enterprise, individual, or institution that may sell or transfer at least a portion of its business to other enterprises, individuals, or institutions, or that may acquire or transfer at least a portion of its business from other enterprises, individuals, or institutions, or that may become the object of investment, financing, stock trading, or bond trading; a patent publication extraction step, which extracts multiple patent publications, multiple published patent publications, or multiple published patent publications that respectively contain the same or related claim categories as the designated goods, designated technology, or designated services, wherein the designated goods, designated technology, or designated services are goods, technologies, or services related to the at least a portion of the business; and the step of... A parameter collection step is implemented, in which at least one first parameter is collected from multiple first parameters for the multiple patent gazettes, the multiple published patent gazettes, or the multiple published patent gazettes. The multiple first parameters include: total number of claims, total number of claim categories, total number of independent claims, total number of dependent claims, maximum number of independent claims within the same claim category, total number of claims in claim categories that are the same as or related to the specified technology or specified service, total number of independent claims in claim categories that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, and total number of dependent claims in claim categories that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service.

[0076] The aforementioned computer program can easily obtain parameters that can be used as a basis for evaluating a company from multiple perspectives, such as its patent competitiveness, robustness, practical accuracy, and technical understanding.

[0077] In the above-described computer program, a second parameter collection step is preferably included, in which the number of cited documents is collected as a second parameter for the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes. The number of cited documents is the number of prior art documents cited by the patent office in the examination of the plurality of patent applications corresponding to the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes.

[0078] In the above computer program, it is preferable to further include a first calculation step, in which a significance probability is calculated as a third parameter based on the correlation between the value of the second parameter and the value of the at least one first parameter.

[0079] The computer program described above preferably includes a second calculation step, in which a correlation coefficient is calculated as a fourth parameter based on the correlation between the values ​​of the second parameter and the at least one first parameter.

[0080] In the above computer program, it is preferable to further implement a third calculation step, in which the ratio of the second parameter to the at least one first parameter is calculated as a fifth parameter.

[0081] In the above-described computer program, a first evaluation step is preferably included, in which the at least one first parameter is used as an evaluation criterion to evaluate the enterprise, individual or organization determined through the enterprise determination step.

[0082] In the above computer program, it is preferable to further include a first evaluation step, in which the second parameter is used as the evaluation standard to evaluate the enterprise, individual or organization determined through the enterprise determination step.

[0083] In the above-mentioned computer program, it is preferable to further include a first evaluation step, in which the third parameter is used as an evaluation standard to evaluate the enterprise, individual or organization determined through the enterprise determination step.

[0084] In the above computer program, it is preferable to further include a first evaluation step, in which the fourth parameter is used as the evaluation standard to evaluate the enterprise, individual or organization determined through the enterprise determination step.

[0085] In the above-mentioned computer program, it is preferable to further include a first evaluation step, in which the fifth parameter is used as the evaluation standard to evaluate the enterprise, individual or organization determined through the enterprise determination step.

[0086] In the aforementioned computer program, the first evaluation step preferably includes a comparison with the results obtained from a second evaluation step on the benchmark enterprise, individual, or institution.

[0087] Some embodiments of the present invention involve a computer program comprising the following steps: an enterprise determination step, which determines an enterprise, individual, or institution that may sell or transfer at least a portion of its business to other enterprises, individuals, or institutions, or that may acquire or transfer at least a portion of its business from other enterprises, individuals, or institutions, or that may become the object of investment, financing, stock trading, or bond trading; a patent publication extraction step, which extracts multiple patent publications, multiple published patent publications, or multiple published patent publications that respectively contain the same or related claim categories as the designated goods, designated technology, or designated services in their claims, wherein the designated goods, designated technology, or designated services are goods, technologies, or services related to the at least a portion of the business; and a collection step, which collects at least one of the total number of limiting elements and the total number of specified phrases from the claims of each of the multiple patent publications, multiple published patent publications, or multiple published patent publications, wherein the total number of limiting elements is the number of limiting elements of the claim, and the total number of specified phrases is the number of specified phrases used to specify the existing limiting elements of the claim and record the relationship between them and other limiting elements.

[0088] In the above computer program, preferably, in the collection step, the total number of defining elements and the total number of specified terms are collected for the claims of the claim category.

[0089] In the above computer program, it is preferable to collect both the total number of the defined elements and the total number of the specified words and phrases.

[0090] In the above computer program, it is preferable to collect at least one of the total number of defining elements and the total number of specified terms for the independent claims of the claim.

[0091] The computer program described above preferably includes a calculation step, in which the ratio of the total number of the defined elements to the total number of the specified words and phrases is calculated.

[0092] In the above-described computer program, a verification step is preferably included, in which a significant difference test is performed between at least one of the number of defined elements and the number of specified words and phrases of the benchmark enterprise, individual, or organization and at least one of the number of defined elements and the number of specified words and phrases obtained by the collection step for the enterprise, individual, or organization determined by the enterprise, etc. steps.

[0093] In the above-described computer program, a verification step is preferably included, in which a significant difference test is performed between the ratio of the benchmark enterprise, individual or institution and the ratio obtained by the calculation step for the enterprise, individual or institution determined by the enterprise or other steps.

[0094] The computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention determines, for each of a plurality of electronically digitized patent publications, a plurality of published patent publications, or a plurality of publicly available patent publications, whether there is a record or the number thereof in at least one of the claims, embodiments, and examples.

[0095] The computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention determines, for each of a plurality of electronically digitized patent publications, a plurality of published patent publications, or a plurality of publicly available patent publications, whether a numerical value is recorded or its quantity exists in at least one of the claims, embodiments, and embodiments.

[0096] The computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention determines, for each of a plurality of electronically digitized patent publications, a plurality of published patent publications, or a plurality of publicly available patent publications, whether there is a description or quantity of a numerical value based on experimental results in the claims, embodiments, and at least one of the embodiments.

[0097] By using the aforementioned computer program, it is possible to obtain, for example, patents or patent applications that are discovery-based inventions and have high basic inventiveness.

[0098] For inventions based on qualitative descriptions that do not contain numerical data, for example, the more specified terms for each defining element, the higher the success rate in competitive or patent litigation.

[0099] Some embodiments of the present invention involve a computer program comprising the following steps: a first step, for multiple electronically digitized patent publications, multiple published patent publications, or multiple publicly available patent publications, collecting at least one of a plurality of first parameters, wherein the plurality of first parameters include: the total number of claims related to the claims of each of the plurality of patent publications, the multiple published patent publications, or the multiple publicly available patent publications; the total number of claim classes; the total number of independent claims; the total number of dependent claims; the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class; the total number of claims of claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified specified goods, specified technology, or specified service; the total number of independent claims of claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified specified goods, specified technology, or specified service; and the total number of dependent claims of claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified specified goods, specified technology, or specified service; a second step, for the multiple patent publications, the multiple published patent publications, or the multiple publicly available patent publications, collecting at least one of a plurality of first parameters, wherein the plurality of first parameters include: the total number of claims related to the claims of each of the plurality of patent publications, the multiple published patent publications, or the multiple publicly available patent publications; ... The process involves: a second step, collecting the number of cited documents as a second parameter from multiple published patent gazettes or multiple published patent gazettes, where the number of cited documents is the number of prior art documents cited by the patent office during the examination of multiple patent applications corresponding to the multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple published patent gazettes; a third step, collecting at least one of the total number of limiting elements and the total number of designated phrases from the claims of each of the multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple published patent gazettes, where the total number of limiting elements is the number of limiting elements in the claims, and the total number of designated phrases is the number of designated phrases used to designate the existing limiting elements of the claims and record the relationship between them and other limiting elements; and a fourth step, for each of the multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple published patent gazettes, determining whether there are any records or numerical records based on experimental results or their quantity in the claims, embodiments, or embodiments.

[0100] The computer program described above preferably further includes the following steps: a fifth step, extracting the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes in such a manner that the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes contain a plurality of first patent gazettes, a plurality of first published patent gazettes, or a plurality of first published patent gazettes in which the applicant or patentee is the first applicant or the first patentee, and a plurality of second patent gazettes, a plurality of second published patent gazettes, or a plurality of second published patent gazettes in which the applicant or patentee is the second applicant or the second patentee; and a sixth step, comparing the plurality of first patent gazettes, the plurality of first published patent gazettes, or the plurality of first published patent gazettes with the plurality of second patent gazettes, the plurality of second published patent gazettes, or the plurality of second published patent gazettes in relation to the results obtained through at least one of the first step, the second step, the third step, and the fourth step, or an evaluation based on the results.

[0101] The computer program described above preferably includes a seventh step, in which a score is given for the result obtained through at least one of the first step, the second step, the third step, and the fourth step, or for an evaluation based on the result.

[0102] In the above computer program, it is preferable to use the deviation value to perform the scoring in the seventh step.

[0103] In the above-described computer program, an eighth step is preferably included, in which at least one of the first step, the second step, the third step, and the fourth step is performed for each of the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of publicly available patent gazettes that contain the applicant or patentee, or the patent gazette, the published patent gazette, or the publicly available patent gazette that is the same as or related to the claim category of the designated goods, the designated technology, or the designated service, and a deviation value is calculated according to the applicant or the patentee, or the designated goods, the designated technology, or the designated service.

[0104] The computer program described above preferably includes a ninth step, in which the result of the seventh step is visualized.

[0105] Some embodiments of the present invention involve apparatuses equipped with the computer programs described above or below.

[0106] The aforementioned device can be used, for example, as a device to indicate potential investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading targets or merger and acquisition plans, or as a device to search for potential merger and acquisition targets.

[0107] Some embodiments of the present invention involve a computer program that collects at least one of the total number of limiting elements and the total number of designated phrases from the claims of multiple electronically digitized patent publications, multiple published patent publications, or multiple publicly available patent publications, and evaluates the total number of limiting elements according to a predetermined range. The total number of limiting elements is the number of limiting elements in the claims, and the total number of designated phrases is the number of designated phrases used to designate the existing limiting elements in the claims and to record the relationship between them and other limiting elements.

[0108] In the above computer program, it is preferable to collect both the number of defined elements and the number of specified words and phrases.

[0109] In the above computer program, it is preferable to collect at least one of the number of defining elements and the number of specified terms for the independent claims of the claim.

[0110] Some embodiments of the present invention involve a computer program comprising the following steps: a first step of collecting at least one parameter from the claims of a plurality of first patent publications, a plurality of first published patent publications, or a plurality of first public patent publications digitized by a first applicant or a first patentee, wherein the total number of limiting elements is the number of limiting elements in the claims, and the total number of designated phrases is the number of designated phrases used to designate the limiting elements that have appeared in the claims and to record the relationship between them and other limiting elements; a second step of collecting at least one parameter from the claims of a plurality of second patent publications, a plurality of second published patent publications, or a plurality of second public patent publications digitized by a second applicant or a second patentee, wherein the total number of limiting elements is the number of limiting elements in the claims, and the total number of designated phrases is the number of designated phrases used to designate the limiting elements that have appeared in the claims and to record the relationship between them and other limiting elements; and a third step of performing a significant difference test on the difference between the value of the at least one parameter collected by the first step and the value of the at least one parameter collected by the second step.

[0111] In the above computer program, it is preferable to collect both the total number of the limiting elements and the total number of the specified words and phrases in the first step, and to collect both the total number of the limiting elements and the total number of the specified words and phrases in the second step.

[0112] In the above computer program, the total number of the defined elements can also be divided into multiple ranges, and a comparison can be made between the first applicant or the first patentee and the second applicant or the second patentee.

[0113] In the above computer program, a fourth step is preferably included, in which a significant difference test is performed on the difference between the ratio of the number of defined elements to the number of specified words and sentences collected in the first step and the ratio of the number of defined elements to the number of specified words and sentences collected in the second step.

[0114] Some embodiments of the present invention involve a computer program comprising the following steps: an enterprise determination step, which identifies an enterprise, individual, or institution that may sell or transfer at least a portion of its business to other enterprises, individuals, or institutions, or that may acquire or transfer at least a portion of its business from other enterprises, individuals, or institutions; a patent publication extraction step, which extracts multiple patent publications, multiple published patent publications, or multiple published patent publications that contain claim categories that are the same as or related to the designated goods, designated technology, or designated services in their claims, wherein the designated goods, designated technology, or designated services are goods, technologies, or services related to the at least a portion of the business; and a first parameter collection step, which implements a first collection step, in which at least one first parameter is collected from multiple first parameters for the multiple patent publications, the multiple published patent publications, or the multiple published patent publications, wherein the multiple first parameters include: total number of claims, total number of claim categories, total number of independent claims, total number of dependent claims, maximum number of independent claims within the same claim category, total number of claims in the claim category, total number of independent claims in the claim category, and number of dependent claims in the claim category.

[0115] In the above-described computer program, a second parameter collection step is preferably included, in which the number of cited documents is collected as a second parameter for the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes. The number of cited documents is the number of prior art documents cited by the patent office in the examination of the plurality of patent applications corresponding to the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes.

[0116] In the above computer program, it is preferable to further include a first calculation step, in which a significance probability is calculated as a third parameter based on the correlation between the value of the second parameter and the value of the at least one first parameter.

[0117] The computer program described above preferably includes a second calculation step, in which a correlation coefficient is calculated as a fourth parameter based on the correlation between the values ​​of the second parameter and the at least one first parameter.

[0118] In the above computer program, it is preferable to further implement a third calculation step, in which the ratio of the second parameter to the at least one first parameter is calculated as a fifth parameter.

[0119] In the above-described computer program, a first evaluation step is preferably included, in which at least one of the first parameter, the second parameter, the third parameter, and the fifth parameter is used as an evaluation criterion to evaluate the enterprise, individual, or organization determined through the enterprise determination step.

[0120] In the aforementioned computer program, the first evaluation step preferably includes a comparison with the results obtained from a second evaluation step on the benchmark enterprise, individual, or institution.

[0121] Some embodiments of the present invention involve a computer program comprising the following steps: an enterprise determination step, which determines an enterprise, individual, or institution that may sell or transfer at least a portion of its business to other enterprises, individuals, or institutions, or that may acquire or transfer at least a portion of its business from other enterprises, individuals, or institutions, or that may become the object of investment, financing, stock trading, or bond trading; a patent publication extraction step, which extracts multiple patent publications, multiple published patent publications, or multiple published patent publications that respectively contain the same or related claim categories as the designated goods, designated technology, or designated services in their claims, wherein the designated goods, designated technology, or designated services are goods, technologies, or services related to the at least a portion of the business; and a collection step, which collects at least one of the number of limiting elements and the number of specified phrases from the claims of each of the multiple patent publications, multiple published patent publications, or multiple published patent publications, wherein the number of limiting elements is the number of limiting elements of the claim, and the number of specified phrases is the number of specified phrases used to specify the existing limiting elements of the claim and record the relationship between them and other limiting elements.

[0122] In the above computer program, preferably, in the collection step, the collection of the number of defining elements and the number of specified terms is performed for the claims of the claim category.

[0123] In the above computer program, it is preferable to collect both the number of defined elements and the number of specified words and phrases.

[0124] In the above computer program, it is preferable to collect at least one of the number of defining elements and the number of specified terms for the independent claims of the claim.

[0125] In the above computer program, a calculation step is preferably included, in which the ratio of the number of defined elements to the number of specified words and phrases is calculated.

[0126] In the above-described computer program, a verification step is preferably included, in which a significant difference test is performed between at least one of the number of defined elements and the number of specified words and phrases of the benchmark enterprise, individual, or organization and at least one of the number of defined elements and the number of specified words and phrases obtained by the collection step for the enterprise, individual, or organization determined by the enterprise, etc. steps.

[0127] In the above-described computer program, a verification step is preferably included, in which a significant difference test is performed between the ratio of the benchmark enterprise, individual or institution and the ratio obtained by the calculation step for the enterprise, individual or institution determined by the enterprise or other steps.

[0128] The intellectual property evaluation method, the intellectual property competitiveness determination method, and the method for determining the target enterprise for investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or merger and acquisition involved in some embodiments of the present invention use at least one of the above-mentioned computer programs.

[0129] The computer programs used in some embodiments of the present invention, such as methods for evaluating intellectual property rights, methods for determining intellectual property competitiveness, and methods for determining target companies in investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or mergers and acquisitions, include at least one of the aforementioned computer programs.

[0130] Some embodiments of the present invention involve computer programs that include any of the aforementioned computer programs and also possess the function of collecting enterprise information. Typical examples of such enterprise information include, for instance, sales revenue, net profit, recurring profit, enterprise value, business value, stock value, free cash flow, dividend per share, dividend payout ratio, dividend yield, growth rate, price-to-earnings ratio, price-to-book ratio, return on equity, recurring profit, total market capitalization, weighted average cost of capital, return on equity, cost of equity, earnings per share, and net earnings per share. It is also possible to obtain two or more of these enterprise information items.

[0131] The aforementioned computer program can be used, for example, to select target companies for investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or mergers and acquisitions.

[0132] Some embodiments of the present invention involve a computer program comprising the following steps: a parameter collection step, collecting at least one parameter from each of a plurality of electronically digitized patent gazettes, a plurality of published patent gazettes, or a plurality of publicly available patent gazettes; and a company information collection step, collecting at least a portion of company information of the company listed as the applicant in the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of publicly available patent gazettes. Typical examples of the aforementioned company information are as described above.

[0133] The computer program described above preferably further includes the following steps: a parameter parsing step, which parses the at least one parameter collected through the parameter collection step; and an enterprise output step, which outputs the enterprise listed as the applicant in a patent gazette, published patent gazette, or publicly available patent gazette that has obtained an evaluation of at least a predetermined value or higher in at least one evaluation item through the parameter parsing step. It should be noted that the application period of the patent or patent application that forms the basis of the evaluation item's calculation and is the object of parameter collection can be appropriately set for each evaluation item. For example, since there is a time lag before commercialization, basic inventiveness (B) is sometimes better used with parameters collected from earlier applications compared to robustness (R), which becomes important after the transition from the market growth period to the stable period. For example, since it is an important evaluation item in the market growth period after the dominant design of a product or service item is established, coverage (C) is sometimes better used with parameters collected from earlier applications compared to robustness (R).

[0134] Typical parameters mentioned above include, for example, the total number of claims, the total number of claim categories, the total number of independent claims, the total number of dependent claims, the total number of claims within the same claim category, the total number of claims in the claim category, the total number of independent claims in the claim category, the number of dependent claims in the claim category, the number of prior art documents or cited documents, the number of the aforementioned limiting elements, and the number of specified terms, etc. The results of correlation analysis, such as the correlation coefficient between multiple parameters, can also be listed.

[0135] In the above computer program, a selection step is preferably included, in which the enterprise output by the enterprise output step is selected as the target enterprise for financing, investment, stock trading, bond trading or merger and acquisition.

[0136] The aforementioned computer program can digitize or compare factors that strongly reflect a company's competitiveness and stability, such as patent competitiveness, robustness, accuracy in patent practice, and technical understanding. This ensures objectivity when selecting companies for financing, investment, stock trading, bond trading, or mergers and acquisitions.

[0137] The computer program described above preferably further includes the following steps: an enterprise evaluation step, which evaluates enterprises based on the enterprise information obtained through the enterprise information collection step; and an enterprise extraction step, which extracts enterprises that have a predetermined value or higher in at least one evaluation item used as a judgment criterion in the enterprise evaluation step; and performs the parameter collection step on the enterprises extracted through the enterprise extraction step.

[0138] The computer program described above preferably further includes the following steps: a parameter parsing step, which parses the at least one parameter collected through the parameter collection step; and an enterprise output step, which outputs enterprises that have achieved a predetermined value or higher in at least one evaluation item through the parameter parsing step.

[0139] Some embodiments of the present invention involve a computer program comprising the following steps: a parameter collection step, which collects multiple parameters from multiple electronically digitized patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple publicly available patent gazettes; an enterprise information collection step, which collects at least a portion of enterprise information of enterprises listed as applicants in the multiple patent gazettes, the multiple published patent gazettes, or the multiple publicly available patent gazettes; a data parsing step, which parses the multiple parameters collected through the parameter collection step and performs evaluations on multiple evaluation items for the multiple patent gazettes, the multiple published patent gazettes, or the multiple publicly available patent gazettes; and an enterprise selection step, which selects at least one enterprise for each or more of the multiple evaluation items.

[0140] Typical examples of the aforementioned evaluation items are described below. Figure 5 The evaluation of coverage (C), technical understanding (U), practical accuracy (P), robustness (R), and fundamental inventiveness (B) shown is the CUPRB evaluation.

[0141] In the above computer program, it is preferable that the enterprise selected through the enterprise selection step is an enterprise that has obtained a score above a predetermined value in each evaluation item in the data parsing step.

[0142] For example, when conducting stock transactions, it is sometimes necessary to consider the balance between investment risk and return. However, in the aforementioned evaluation items, for instance, if growth potential is emphasized, the investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or M&A targets can include more companies ranked higher in coverage (C); if stability is prioritized over risk, the investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or M&A targets can include more companies ranked higher in stability (R). Furthermore, in the case of long-term investments, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or M&A, the evaluation of basic inventiveness (B) can also be emphasized. If the practical ability of intellectual property is emphasized, the evaluation of practical accuracy (P) can also be emphasized; if the level of technology is emphasized, the evaluation of technical understanding (U) can also be emphasized.

[0143] In the aforementioned evaluation categories, for example, a company's ranking can be determined for more than two evaluation categories. In this case, for example, when selecting companies for financing, investment, stock trading, or bond trading, focusing on the growth stage, the application period of patents or patent applications can be selected as the parameter collection object for the evaluation category, based on a predetermined ratio of coverage (C) to fundamental invention (B). In this case, depending on the evaluation category, fundamental invention (B) requires a certain period to be reflected in the business; therefore, compared to robustness (R), which becomes important after the transition to a stable period, it is sometimes better to use parameters collected from earlier applications. Since coverage (C) is an important evaluation category during the market growth stage after the dominant design of a product or service is established, it is sometimes better to use parameters collected from earlier applications compared to robustness (R).

[0144] The device involved in this invention is equipped with any of the above-mentioned computer programs.

[0145] At least any part of the aforementioned computer program can be performed by the user himself, such as a patent evaluation method, a method for selecting target companies for investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or mergers and acquisitions, or a due diligence method.

[0146] (Invention effect)

[0147] According to some embodiments of the present invention, it is possible to effectively evaluate the competitiveness, robustness, accuracy of intellectual property practice, basic inventiveness, and technical understanding of numerous patent applications and patents, thereby enabling them to be used for the selection of target companies and due diligence in investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or mergers and acquisitions. Attached Figure Description

[0148] Figure 1 This is a diagram illustrating the computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention.

[0149] Figure 2 This is a diagram illustrating the computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention.

[0150] Figure 3 This is a diagram illustrating the computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention.

[0151] Figure 4 This is a diagram illustrating the computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention.

[0152] Figure 5 This is a diagram illustrating the computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention.

[0153] Figure 6This is a diagram illustrating the computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention.

[0154] Figure 7 This is a diagram illustrating the computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention.

[0155] Figure 8 This is a diagram illustrating the computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention.

[0156] Figure 9 This is a diagram illustrating the computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention.

[0157] Figure 10 This is a diagram illustrating the computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention.

[0158] Figure 11 This is a diagram illustrating the computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention.

[0159] Figure 12 This is a diagram illustrating the computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention.

[0160] Figure 13 These are apparatus diagrams related to some embodiments of the present invention.

[0161] (Symbol Explanation)

[0162] 1: Patent Database

[0163] 2: Information processing device

[0164] 3: Network line Detailed Implementation

[0165] The following is for reference. Figures 1 to 13 Some embodiments of the present invention will be described below. It should be noted that these drawings are used to illustrate specific examples of these embodiments, and the scope of the present invention and its concepts is not limited to these embodiments. Figure 1 The diagram illustrates steps 1 to 4 of a computer program involved in some embodiments of the present invention. In this computer program, step 1 (S1) involves inputting a designated applicant or designated right holder, designated goods, designated technology, or designated service. Step 2 (S2) involves retrieving patent gazettes, published patent gazettes, or published patent gazettes that include the designated goods, designated technology, or designated service input in step S1 within the claim category. It should be noted that the input designated service may also include, for example, service items, business models, and operations. Furthermore, the patent gazettes, published patent gazettes, or published patent gazettes retrieved in step S2 will be collectively referred to as "retrieved patent gazettes," etc.

[0166] As step 3 (S3), the following data are collected from the extraction of patent gazettes, etc. in step S2: total number of claims (a or m), total number of claim classes (b or n), total number of independent claims (c or o), total number of dependent claims (d or p), maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class (e or q), total number of claims in claim classes that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service (f or r), total number of independent claims in claim classes that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service (g or s), and total number of dependent claims in claim classes that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service (h or t).

[0167] It should be noted that Table 1 shows typical claim-related parameters obtained in step S3. Parameters at the time of patent application or publication include, for example: total number of claims (a), total number of claim classes (b), total number of independent claims (c), total number of dependent claims (d), maximum number of independent claims within a claim class (e), total number of claims within a specified claim class (f), total number of independent claims within a specified claim class (g), and total number of dependent claims within a specified claim class (h). Parameters at the time of patent grant announcement include, for example: total number of claims (m), total number of claim classes (n), total number of independent claims (o), total number of dependent claims (p), maximum number of independent claims within a claim class (q), total number of claims within a specified claim class (r), total number of independent claims within a specified claim class (s), and total number of dependent claims within a specified claim class (t).

[0168] [Table 1]

[0169]

[0170] As step 4 (S4), the number of documents cited by the examiner during examination is determined from the patent gazettes extracted in step S2.

[0171] Figure 2 Steps 5 through 7 of the computer program are shown. In step 5 (S5), the number of specified words in each claim (the words "the," "this," "the," "the above," and "this") and the number of limiting elements (verbs, nouns, adjectives, and adverbs) in the claim other than the specified words are counted. These limiting elements are preferably content words.

[0172] The following are typical examples of limiting elements and specified words / phrases for illustration.

[0173] "(Claim 1) A device, characterized in that it comprises:

[0174] The first unit detects the effective value of the current supplied to the electromechanical equipment.

[0175] The second unit stores the current value of the coil current of the electromechanical device, which corresponds to the maximum torque of the electromechanical device.

[0176] The third unit calculates the ratio of the effective value to the current value and outputs data corresponding to the ratio; and

[0177] The fourth unit controls the voltage applied to the electromechanical device based on the data described.

[0178] In the above example, “< >” and “[ ]” are used to represent limiting elements and all specified words and phrases, respectively.

[0179] In the computer program involved in this embodiment, attention is also paid to predicates such as verbs, and modifiers such as adjectives or adverbs. The reason is as follows: the boundaries of a patented invention are determined according to the All Element Rule. Specifically, if the accused infringing product satisfies all the elements (limiting elements) in the claims that constitute a limitation in the interpretation of the claims, it is generally judged to be a patent infringement.

[0180] For example, modifiers such as "electric" in "electric machinery" or "corresponding" in "data corresponding to the ratio" are used to define "machinery" or "data," respectively. Therefore, these modifiers and limiting other limiting elements, such as "electric" or "corresponding," are also counted as limiting elements. It should be noted that "first" or "second" in "first unit" or "second unit" are terms used for ease of drafting the claims and do not substantially limit the scope of the claims. Therefore, they are not included in the limiting elements in the computer program involved in this embodiment. As can be seen from the above, the total number L of limiting elements in claim 1 of the above example is 41.

[0181] In addition to the aforementioned limiting elements, the description of the claims was analyzed using designated phrases. Designated phrases refer to the word "the" in "the effective value" or "the ratio" in the above examples; here, it is used to specify the limiting elements already appearing in the claims, namely "effective value" or "ratio." The total number of designated phrases S in claim 1 of the above examples is 6. In the computer program involved in this embodiment, in addition to "the," words such as "this," "the," "the above," and "this" are also used as designated phrases. The total number of designated phrases (S) basically corresponds to the relational description of the limiting elements in the claims.

[0182] As step 6 (S6), it is confirmed whether there is a quantitative expression or its quantity in the specific embodiments or examples extracted from the patent gazette, etc. For example, a quantitative expression can be given as an example of recording experimental results based on actual numerical data. For instance, the proportion of patent applications or patents containing quantitative expressions in the embodiments or examples can be determined according to the specified applicant or patentee, the specified technology, or the product.

[0183] As in step 7 (S7), the ratio of the two parameters is calculated from the parameters obtained in steps S3 and S4, as shown in Tables 2 and 3 below. Table 2 is based on parameters extracted from the claims at the time of patent application or publication, and Table 3 is based on parameters extracted from the claims at the time of patent grant or registration.

[0184] [Table 2]

[0185]

[0186] [Table 3]

[0187]

[0188] Table 2 shows the ratios of parameters extracted from the claims at the time of patent application or publication, specifically b / a, c / a, d / a, e / a, f / a, g / a, h / a, x / a, c / b, d / b, e / b, f / b, g / b, h / b, x / b, d / c, e / c, f / c, g / c, h / c, x / c, e / d, f / d, g / d, h / d, x / d, f / e, g / e, h / e, x / e, g / f, h / f, x / f, h / g, x / g, and x / h in this embodiment.

[0189] Table 3 shows the ratios of parameters extracted from the claims at the time of patent grant announcement, which in this embodiment are specifically n / m, o / m, p / m, q / m, r / m, s / m, t / m, x / m, o / n, p / n, q / n, r / n, s / n, t / n, x / n, p / o, q / o, r / o, s / o, t / o, x / o, q / p, r / p, s / p, t / p, x / p, r / q, s / q, t / q, x / q, s / r, t / r, x / r, t / s, x / s, and x / t.

[0190] In step 8 (S8), the correlation coefficient between two parameters among the extracted parameters related to the claims is obtained. Table 4 shows the correlation coefficients r of the parameters extracted from the claims at the time of patent application or publication. a 1~r a 36. Table 5 shows the correlation coefficients r based on parameters extracted from the claims at the time of patent grant announcement or patent registration. b 1~r b 36.

[0191] [Table 4]

[0192]

[0193] [Table 5]

[0194]

[0195] In step 9 (S9), an evaluation is performed based on the values ​​obtained through steps S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, and S8. Preferably, the evaluation is performed by performing the same calculations in advance for the applicant or patentee who will serve as the benchmark, or for the designated goods, technology, or service, based on the information desired, or by comparing the results with previously saved benchmark data.

[0196] Table 6 shows the calculated values ​​and parameters for each of the evaluation objects: coverage (C), technical understanding (U), practical accuracy (P), robustness (R), and fundamental inventiveness (B).

[0197] Coverage (C) is an evaluation metric related to the extent to which a patent covers the maximum scope of its claims. Since it relates to the size of the claims, it primarily involves parameters related to the number of independent claims, such as the total number of independent claims (c and o), the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class (e and q), and the total number of independent claims in a specified claim class (g and s). However, the scope of claims is limited by prior art or cited literature. Therefore, in order to achieve the maximum scope of claims based on the number of cited documents, in addition to the parameters related to the number of independent claims mentioned above, it is preferable to also include the ratio to the number of cited documents (x) in the evaluation of coverage (C). Coverage (C) represents the maximum scope of claims obtained or desired within the scope of patent rights defined by cited documents or prior art, and this is considered a core part of patent competitiveness.

[0198] Technical understanding (U) is an evaluation of whether prior art or cited literature has been understood and its content has been grasped, and this understanding is reflected in the claims. Specifically, the correlation coefficient between the number of cited documents (x) and the number of independent claims, such as the total number of independent claims (c and o), the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class (e and q), and the total number of independent claims in a specified claim class (g and s), is used as an indicator.

[0199] Practical accuracy (P) is evaluated, for example, based on the ratio of the number of specified terms (S) to the number of defining elements (L). The rationale is as follows: when drafting claims, for example, when describing the relationship between defining elements, the relationship with new defining elements is described by adding specified terms such as "the," "this," "the," "the aforementioned," etc., before existing defining elements. Therefore, the ratio of the number of specified terms (S) to the number of defining elements (L) becomes an indicator of the accuracy of describing the relationship between defining elements.

[0200] Robustness (R) is, for example, an indicator of resilience to patent invalidation or revocation requests. For instance, in responding to patent invalidation or revocation requests, it becomes crucial that dependent claims are appropriately configured based on an understanding and mastery of the prior art or cited literature. Therefore, a correlation coefficient reflecting the number of cited documents (x) and the total number of dependent claims (d or p) or the total number of dependent claims within a specified claim category (h or t) can be considered.

[0201] Basic inventiveness (B) corresponds, for example, to the discovery of a new insight. Specifically, it is, for example, an evaluation of a description, i.e., a quantitative expression, that includes specific numerical values ​​in an implementation or embodiment. For example, the proportion of patent applications or patents with quantitative expressions in an implementation or embodiment can be determined according to, for example, a specified applicant or patentee, a specified technology or product.

[0202] [Table 6]

[0203]

[0204] Figure 4 Example of a computer program is shown that scores various elements including coverage (C), technical understanding (U), practical accuracy (P), robustness (R), and fundamental inventiveness (B). First, the computer program involved in this embodiment uses a database or the Internet to determine the implementing companies of business W and their market share, specifically identifying companies a, b, c, d, e, and f as implementing companies of business W. Next, it retrieves patent applications or patents related to business W filed within a predetermined period for each of companies a, b, c, d, e, and f. Patent applications and patents related to business W refer, for example, to patent applications and patents whose claims include the categories of claims related to goods or services or service items related to business W.

[0205] Next, for the extracted patent application or patent, when the patent application is the extraction target, for example, the following parameters are collected: total number of claims (a), total number of claim classes (b), total number of independent claims (c), total number of dependent claims (d), maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class (e), total number of claims within a specified claim class (f), total number of independent claims within a specified claim class (g), and total number of dependent claims within a specified claim class (h). When the patent is the extraction target, for example, the following parameters are collected: total number of claims (m), total number of claim classes (n), total number of independent claims (o), total number of dependent claims (p), maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class (q), total number of claims within a specified claim class (r), total number of independent claims within a specified claim class (s), and total number of dependent claims within a specified claim class (t). Furthermore, the number of cited documents (x) cited by the examiner during the examination of the patent being extracted is collected. When a patent application that has not yet been granted a patent is the extraction target, the number of cited documents (x) can be obtained from the patent corresponding to that patent application.

[0206] For each of Company A, Company B, Company C, Company D, Company E, and Company F, count the number of specified words (words such as “the,” “the,” “this,” “the aforementioned,” “the foregoing,” and “this” that specify the preceding words) and the number of limiting elements (verbs, nouns, adjectives, and adverbs) in the claim other than the specified words.

[0207] The scoring of each element of coverage (C), technical understanding (U), practical accuracy (P), robustness (R), and fundamental inventiveness (B) can be based on the correspondence table shown in Table 6 between coverage (C), technical understanding (U), practical accuracy (P), robustness (R), and fundamental inventiveness (B) and parameters and data obtained by processing the parameters. For example, the same evaluation can be performed on the magnitude of the difference from the benchmark or a set of a certain size, thereby using deviation values, etc. for evaluation.

[0208] Figure 5 The diagram shows a radar chart visualizing the evaluation results regarding coverage (C), technical understanding (U), practical accuracy (P), robustness (R), and fundamental inventiveness (B). This visualization provides an intuitive understanding of patents and patent applications from multiple perspectives.

[0209] Figure 6 The document illustrates an example of applying the computer program involved in this embodiment to market share. First, data on the manufacturer or seller of product X, and the market share of product X in the market by that manufacturer or seller, are obtained. Patent applications or patents filed by the extracted manufacturers or sellers (i.e., companies A, B, C, and D, as the manufacturers or sellers) within a predetermined period are extracted. Here, the predetermined period may be, for example, the period from the start of the development period of product X, the product under investigation, to the end of its sales. Alternatively, the computer program involved in this embodiment may set the predetermined period based on the product life cycle, such as the introduction period, growth period, maturity period, and decline period. For each of companies A, B, C, and D, parameters as shown in Table 1 are collected from the extracted patent applications or patents, and the ratios or correlation coefficients between these parameters are calculated. Companies A, B, C, and D are then ranked according to coverage (C), technical understanding (U), practical accuracy (P), robustness (R), and fundamental inventiveness (B).

[0210] Figure 7The document illustrates an example of using the computer program described in this embodiment to extract potential acquisition targets. Companies implementing the company's ongoing business Y and their market share are retrieved from a database or the internet. Next, for the extracted companies implementing business Y (i.e., Company E, Company F, and Company G) and the company itself, patents or patent applications filed within a predetermined period related to business Y are extracted, and the parameters shown in Table 1 are collected. Furthermore, ratios or correlation coefficients between these parameters are calculated, and evaluations are performed on coverage (C), technical understanding (U), practical accuracy (P), robustness (R), and fundamental inventiveness (B). The company's parameter analysis results are added to the parameter analysis results of Company E, Company F, and Company G to create a radar chart. This allows determination of which of Company E, Company F, and Company G can achieve a high evaluation on the desired evaluation axis in each of the coverage (C), technical understanding (U), practical accuracy (P), robustness (R), and fundamental inventiveness (B) categories.

[0211] Figure 8 This document illustrates the application of the computer program described in this embodiment to the integration and withdrawal of business operations. First, patent applications or patents associated with specific business operations S, T, U, and V of the company are extracted. For the extracted patent applications or patents, parameters as shown in Table 1 are collected, and ratios or correlation coefficients between multiple parameters as shown in Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5 are further obtained. Based on the above parameters and calculation results, an evaluation (CUPRB evaluation) is performed on coverage (C), technical understanding (U), practical accuracy (P), robustness (R), and fundamental inventiveness (B). This allows for the identification of businesses with highly competitive patent portfolios or those with patent portfolios capable of maintaining a high market share. For businesses that do not have a particular advantage from a patent portfolio perspective, decisions can be made to transfer them to other companies or terminate the business.

[0212] Figure 9 This document illustrates a scenario where the computer program described in this embodiment is used to assess the strengths and weaknesses of competitor companies in their patent strategies. The competitor companies and their market shares for our product Z are obtained from a database or the internet. For patent applications or patents with H, I, and J as applicants or patent holders, the parameters shown in Table 1 are collected. For example, the ratios or correlation coefficients between multiple parameters shown in Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5 are further obtained. Then, using H as a benchmark, statistical tests are performed to determine whether our parameters or parameter analysis results differ, and our company is analyzed.

[0213] Figure 10This is a diagram illustrating a computer program used to evaluate the results of patents or patent applications of companies targeted for investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or mergers and acquisitions, as described in some embodiments of the present invention. The evaluation of the patent or patent application can substantially utilize at least any portion of the aforementioned computer program.

[0214] The typical actions of this computer program are as follows.

[0215] In the first step, list the companies in the target business and / or target industry. It should be noted that the number of companies listed, their nationalities, company sizes, and other listing criteria can be set appropriately.

[0216] In the second step, patents or patent applications filed by the companies listed in the first step within a predetermined period are extracted. This predetermined period can be appropriately selected in a computer program or manually; however, typical examples of patents or patent applications to be extracted include those filed between 5 and 1.5 years prior to the planned date of an investment, financing, stock transaction, bond transaction, or merger and acquisition, and more typically, those filed between 3 and 1.5 years prior to the planned date of the investment. The extraction can be of patents or patent applications, or both.

[0217] In the third step, the parameters of the patent or patent application extracted in the second step are collected. Typical parameters include at least one of the following: the total number of claims related to the claims; the total number of claim classes; the total number of independent claims; the total number of dependent claims; the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class; the total number of claims in claim classes that are the same as or related to the specified goods, technology, or service; the total number of independent claims in claim classes that are the same as or related to the specified goods, technology, or service; and the total number of dependent claims in claim classes that are the same as or related to the specified goods, technology, or service; the number of defining elements in the claims, i.e., the total number of defining elements; the number of designated phrases used to designate the defining elements that appear in the claims and to describe the relationship between them and other defining elements, i.e., the total number of designated phrases; and whether there is a quantitative expression or its quantity in the claims or description.

[0218] In the fourth step, the parameters extracted in the third step are parsed.

[0219] In the fifth step, the results of the above analysis are typically output in the form of statistical data such as deviation values, average values, and correlation coefficients for each enterprise, and then sorted.

[0220] In the sixth step, based on the ranking performed in the fifth step, information about companies ranked before a predetermined position is obtained, either currently, or within a predetermined period from the current position, or within a period from the current position to the predetermined period. Typical examples of this company information include, for instance, sales revenue, net profit, recurring profit, enterprise value, business value, stock value, free cash flow, dividend per share, dividend payout ratio, dividend yield, growth rate, price-to-earnings ratio, price-to-book ratio, return on equity, recurring profit, total market capitalization, weighted average cost of capital, return on equity, cost of equity, earnings per share, and net earnings per share. Alternatively, two or more of these company information items may be obtained.

[0221] In the seventh step, companies that meet predetermined criteria are identified. Typical criteria include, for example: a price-to-earnings ratio (P / E ratio) above or below a predetermined value; a stock value above a predetermined value; a price-to-book ratio (P / B ratio) above or below a predetermined value; a growth rate above a predetermined value; a return on equity above a predetermined value; a dividend per share above a predetermined value; earnings per share above a predetermined value; net earnings per share above a predetermined value; a return on equity above a predetermined value; a dividend payout ratio above a predetermined value; and a dividend yield above a predetermined value. Among these criteria, the P / E ratio and P / B ratio are referred to as PER (Price Earnings Ratio) and PBR (Price Book-value Ratio), respectively. Lower values ​​are more suitable as indicators of undervaluation, especially for stock investment.

[0222] In the eighth step, companies that meet the predetermined criteria in the seventh step are selected as targets for investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or mergers and acquisitions.

[0223] Figure 11 This is a diagram illustrating a computer program used to explain some embodiments of the present invention, which employs evaluation results for selecting target companies for investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or mergers and acquisitions, including their patents or patent applications. This computer program is related to the use of… Figure 10 The difference in the described computer program lies primarily in the altered order of analysis based on company information and parameter parsing of patents or patent applications. Specifically, after extracting candidate companies for investment, financing, stock transactions, bond transactions, or mergers and acquisitions based on company information, analysis based on patents and patent applications is performed to determine the target company for investment, financing, stock transactions, bond transactions, or mergers and acquisitions.

[0224] Figure 12This is a diagram illustrating a computer program used to explain some embodiments of the present invention, which employs evaluation results of patents or patent applications for selecting target companies for investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or mergers and acquisitions. Specifically, the computer program extracts multiple target companies for investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or mergers and acquisitions based on the ranking of each evaluation item in the parameter parsing of the patent or patent application. Thus, for example, a portfolio of stock investments can be created.

[0225] The typical actions of this computer program are as follows.

[0226] In the first step, list the companies in the target business and / or target industry. It should be noted that the number of companies listed, their nationalities, company sizes, and other listing criteria can be set appropriately.

[0227] In the second step, patents or patent applications filed by the companies listed in the first step within a predetermined period are extracted. This predetermined period can be appropriately selected in a computer program or manually; however, typical examples of patents or patent applications to be extracted include those filed between 5 and 1.5 years prior to the planned date of an investment, financing, stock transaction, bond transaction, or merger and acquisition, and more typically, those filed between 3 and 1.5 years prior to the planned date of the investment. The extraction can be of patents or patent applications, or both.

[0228] In the third step, parameters associated with each evaluation item of the patent or patent application extracted in the second step are collected. Typical evaluation items include, for example... Figure 5 The evaluation (CUPRB evaluation) shows coverage (C), technical understanding (U), practical accuracy (P), robustness (R), and fundamental inventiveness (B). Regarding coverage (C), companies with higher market share during the growth phase of a market, after the dominant design of a product or service project is established, exhibit relatively higher values, thus becoming an indicator of high growth rate. On the other hand, regarding robustness (R), companies with higher market share during the stable phase of a market exhibit relatively higher values, thus becoming an indicator of company stability.

[0229] Typical parameters include at least one of the following: the total number of claims related to the claims, the total number of claim classes, the total number of independent claims, the total number of dependent claims, the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class, the total number of claims in claim classes that are the same as or related to the specified goods, technology, or service, the total number of independent claims in claim classes that are the same as or related to the specified goods, technology, or service, and the total number of dependent claims in claim classes that are the same as or related to the specified goods, technology, or service; the number of defining elements in the claims, i.e., the total number of defining elements; the number of specified phrases used to specify the defining elements that have appeared in the claims and to record the relationship between them and other defining elements, i.e., the total number of specified phrases; and whether there is a quantitative expression or its quantity in the claims or description.

[0230] In the fourth step, the parameters extracted in the third step are parsed.

[0231] In the fifth step, the results of the above analysis are typically output in the form of statistical data such as deviation values, average values, and correlation coefficients for each evaluation item and for each enterprise, and then sorted.

[0232] In the sixth step, based on the ranking of each evaluation item in the fifth step, information about companies ranked before a predetermined position is obtained, either currently, or within a predetermined period from the current position, or within a period from the current position to the predetermined period. Typical examples of this company information include, for instance, sales revenue, net profit, recurring profit, enterprise value, business value, stock value, free cash flow, dividend per share, dividend payout ratio, dividend yield, growth rate, price-to-earnings ratio, price-to-book ratio, return on equity, recurring profit, total market capitalization, weighted average cost of capital, return on equity, cost of equity, earnings per share, and net earnings per share. Alternatively, two or more of these company information items may be obtained.

[0233] In the seventh step, companies that meet the predetermined criteria for each evaluation item are identified. Typical criteria include, for example: price-to-earnings ratio (P / E ratio) above or below the predetermined value; stock value above the predetermined value; price-to-book ratio (P / B ratio) above or below the predetermined value; growth rate above the predetermined value; return on equity above the predetermined value; dividend per share above the predetermined value; earnings per share above the predetermined value; net earnings per share above the predetermined value; return on equity above the predetermined value; dividend payout ratio above the predetermined value; and dividend yield above the predetermined value. Among these criteria, the P / E ratio and P / B ratio are referred to as PER (Price Earnings Ratio) and PBR (Price Book-value Ratio), respectively. Lower values ​​are more suitable as indicators of undervaluation, especially for stock investment.

[0234] In the eighth step, for each evaluation item, companies that meet the predetermined criteria in the seventh step are identified as potential targets for stock investments, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or mergers and acquisitions. It should be noted that the number of potential target companies for each evaluation item can be appropriately determined based on the risk and return of the established stock investment portfolio. For example, if growth is a priority, a larger number of companies with higher rankings in coverage (C) can be included in the stock investment portfolio; if stability is prioritized over risk, a larger number of companies with higher rankings in stability (R) can be included.

[0235] Figure 13 The diagram illustrates the configuration of an apparatus according to some embodiments of the present invention. Figure 13 In this document, symbols 1 to 3 represent the patent database, the information processing device, and the network line, respectively. Here, the information processing device 2 is equipped with computer programs according to some embodiments of the present invention. By connecting the information processing device 2 to the patent database 1 via the network line 3, evaluation results obtained using the aforementioned computer program can be acquired. Users A, B, and C, who have signed a usage contract for the information processing device 2, can browse the database and, for example, make judgments based on the browsed or output information, such as those related to mergers and acquisitions, litigation, patent negotiations, stock trading, bond trading, financing, or due diligence during IPOs.

Claims

1. A computer program, characterized in that, Including the first data collection step, In the first data collection step, for multiple electronically digitized patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple publicly available patent gazettes, at least one of multiple first parameters is collected. The multiple first parameters include: the total number of claims related to the claims of each of the multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple publicly available patent gazettes; the total number of claim categories; the total number of independent claims; the total number of dependent claims; the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim category; the total number of claims in claim categories that are the same as or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service; the total number of independent claims in claim categories that are the same as or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service; and the total number of dependent claims in claim categories that are the same as or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service.

2. The computer program according to claim 1, characterized in that, It also includes a determination step, in which the applicant or patentee of each of the plurality of patent gazettes, the published patent gazettes or the published patent gazettes is determined.

3. The computer program according to claim 1, characterized in that, It also includes a first extraction step, in which multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes or multiple published patent gazettes are extracted from the multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes or multiple published patent gazettes from which the applicant or patentee is a designated enterprise, individual or institution.

4. The computer program according to claim 1, characterized in that, It also includes a second data collection step, in which the number of cited documents is collected as a second parameter for the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes or the plurality of published patent gazettes. The number of cited documents is the number of prior art documents cited by the patent office in the examination of the plurality of patent applications corresponding to the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes or the plurality of published patent gazettes.

5. The computer program according to claim 1, characterized in that, It also includes a designation step in which the designated goods or services are designated based on the enterprise, individual or organization being investigated, or the goods being manufactured or sold or the services being provided by the enterprise, individual or organization being investigated.

6. The computer program according to claim 1, characterized in that, It also includes a selection step, in which the designated goods or services are selected based on the survey results from an electronic database or the Internet regarding the enterprise, individual or organization being surveyed, or the goods or services being manufactured or sold by the enterprise, individual or organization being surveyed, or the services being implemented.

7. The computer program according to claim 4, characterized in that, It also includes a first calculation step, in which a significance probability is calculated as a third parameter based on the correlation between the value of the second parameter and the value of the at least one first parameter.

8. The computer program according to claim 4, characterized in that, It also includes a second calculation step, in which a correlation coefficient is calculated as a fourth parameter based on the correlation between the values ​​of the second parameter and the at least one first parameter.

9. The computer program according to claim 4, characterized in that, It also includes a third calculation step, in which the ratio of the second parameter to the at least one first parameter is calculated as a fifth parameter.

10. The computer program according to claim 1, characterized in that, The plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes include at least a plurality of first patent gazettes, a plurality of first published patent gazettes, or a plurality of first published patent gazettes belonging to the first group, and a plurality of second patent gazettes, a plurality of second published patent gazettes, or a plurality of second published patent gazettes belonging to the second group. The computer program further includes a first testing step, in which a significant difference test is performed on the difference between the at least one first parameter and the second group.

11. The computer program according to claim 4, characterized in that, The plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes include at least a plurality of first patent gazettes, a plurality of first published patent gazettes, or a plurality of first published patent gazettes belonging to the first group, and a plurality of second patent gazettes, a plurality of second published patent gazettes, or a plurality of second published patent gazettes belonging to the second group. The computer program further includes a second testing step, in which a significant difference test is performed on the difference between the second parameter in the first group and the second group.

12. The computer program according to claim 7, characterized in that, The plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes include at least a plurality of first patent gazettes, a plurality of first published patent gazettes, or a plurality of first published patent gazettes belonging to the first group, and a plurality of second patent gazettes, a plurality of second published patent gazettes, or a plurality of second published patent gazettes belonging to the second group. The computer program further includes a third testing step, in which a significant difference test is performed on the difference between the third parameter in the first group and the second group.

13. The computer program according to claim 8, characterized in that, The plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes include at least a plurality of first patent gazettes, a plurality of first published patent gazettes, or a plurality of first published patent gazettes belonging to the first group, and a plurality of second patent gazettes, a plurality of second published patent gazettes, or a plurality of second published patent gazettes belonging to the second group. The computer program further includes a fourth testing step, in which a significant difference test is performed on the difference between the fourth parameter in the first group and the second group.

14. The computer program according to claim 9, characterized in that, The plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of published patent gazettes include at least a plurality of first patent gazettes, a plurality of first published patent gazettes, or a plurality of first published patent gazettes belonging to the first group, and a plurality of second patent gazettes, a plurality of second published patent gazettes, or a plurality of second published patent gazettes belonging to the second group. The computer program further includes a fifth testing step, in which a significant difference test is performed on the difference between the fifth parameter in the first group and the second group.

15. The computer program according to claim 1, characterized in that, It also includes a second extraction step, in which multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple published patent gazettes are extracted from the multiple patent gazettes, the multiple published patent gazettes, or the multiple published patent gazettes that correspond to the patents in the patent infringement lawsuits filed with the court or the invalidation requests or opposition applications submitted to the patent office.

16. The computer program according to claim 1, characterized in that, It also includes a third extraction step, in which the target patent is extracted using an electronic database or the Internet, and multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes or multiple published patent gazettes corresponding to the target patent are extracted from the multiple patent gazettes, the multiple published patent gazettes or the multiple published patent gazettes. The target patent is the patent that has become the subject of multiple patent infringement lawsuits filed in court or invalidation requests or opposition applications filed with the patent office.

17. The computer program according to any one of claims 10 to 14, characterized in that, It also includes the following steps: The fourth extraction step involves extracting the applicants of the plurality of first patent gazettes, the plurality of first published patent gazettes, or the plurality of first public patent gazettes as the first applicant; as well as The fifth extraction step involves extracting the applicants of the plurality of second patent gazettes, the plurality of second published patent gazettes, or the plurality of second public patent gazettes as second applicants.

18. The computer program according to claim 1, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the first data collection step is stored.

19. The computer program according to claim 2, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the determining step is stored.

20. The computer program according to claim 3, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the first extraction step is stored.

21. The computer program according to claim 4, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the second data collection step is stored.

22. The computer program according to claim 5, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the specified step is stored.

23. The computer program according to claim 6, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the selection step is stored.

24. The computer program according to claim 7, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the first calculation step is stored.

25. The computer program according to claim 8, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the second calculation step is stored.

26. The computer program according to claim 9, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the third calculation step is stored.

27. The computer program according to claim 10, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the first verification step is stored.

28. The computer program according to claim 11, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the second verification step is stored.

29. The computer program according to claim 12, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the third verification step is stored.

30. The computer program according to claim 13, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the fourth verification step is stored.

31. The computer program according to claim 14, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the fifth verification step is stored.

32. The computer program according to claim 15, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the second extraction step is stored.

33. The computer program according to claim 16, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the third extraction step is stored.

34. The computer program according to claim 17, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the fourth extraction step is stored.

35. The computer program according to claim 17, characterized in that, It also includes a storage step, in which at least a portion of the implementation process or result of the fifth extraction step is stored.

36. The computer program according to any one of claims 18 to 34, characterized in that, At least a portion of the implementation process or result of the storage step is used as benchmark or reference data.

37. The computer program according to any one of claims 10 to 14, characterized in that, At least one first data obtained from the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of first public patent publications will be used as a benchmark for at least one second data obtained from the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second public patent publications, and will be analyzed or parsed accordingly.

38. A computer program, characterized in that, Implement the following steps: Multiple target patents are extracted using electronic databases or the Internet. These multiple target patents are patents that are the subject of multiple patent infringement lawsuits filed in court or multiple invalidation requests or multiple opposition applications filed with the Patent Office. The multiple target patents are identified as either winning patents or maintained patents, as well as multiple losing patents or invalid patents. The winning patents are the target patents in which the patentee wins in the multiple patent infringement lawsuits. The maintained patents are the patents that are maintained in the multiple invalidation requests or multiple opposition applications. The losing patents are the target patents in the patent infringement lawsuits in which the patentee loses. The invalid patents are the patents that are not maintained in the multiple invalidation requests or multiple opposition applications. Extract multiple first patent publications, multiple first-publication patent publications, or multiple first-publication patent publications corresponding to the multiple victorious patents or the multiple maintained patents; Extract multiple second patent publications, multiple second-publication patent publications, or multiple second-publication patent publications corresponding to the multiple failed patents or the multiple maintained patents; The first parameter may be collected from at least one of a plurality of first parameters, or the number of cited documents may be collected as a second parameter. The plurality of first parameters include: the total number of claims related to the claims of the plurality of first patent gazettes, the plurality of first published patent gazettes, or the plurality of first public patent gazettes; the total number of claim classes; the total number of independent claims; the total number of dependent claims; the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class; the total number of claims of claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified specified goods, specified technology, or specified service; the total number of independent claims of claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified specified goods, specified technology, or specified service; and the total number of dependent claims of claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified specified goods, specified technology, or specified service. The number of cited documents is the number of prior art documents cited by the patent office in the examination of the patent applications for the plurality of first patent gazettes, the plurality of first published patent gazettes, or the plurality of first public patent gazettes. For the plurality of second patent publications, plurality of second disclosure patent publications, or plurality of second public patent publications, at least one first parameter or the second parameter is collected.

39. The computer program according to claim 37, characterized in that, For the plurality of first patent publications, plurality of first-published patent publications or plurality of first-publication patent publications, and the plurality of second patent publications, plurality of second-published patent publications or plurality of second-publication patent publications, the significance probability of the correlation between the value of the second parameter and the value of the at least one first parameter is calculated as the third parameter.

40. The computer program according to claim 37, characterized in that, For the plurality of first patent publications, plurality of first-disclosure patent publications or plurality of first-table patent publications, and the plurality of second patent publications, plurality of second-disclosure patent publications or plurality of second-table patent publications, the correlation coefficient between the value of the second parameter and the value of the at least one first parameter is calculated as the fourth parameter.

41. The computer program according to any one of claims 37 to 39, characterized in that, For the at least one first parameter or the second parameter, a significant difference test is performed between the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first-published patent publications, or the plurality of first-table patent publications and the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second-published patent publications, or the plurality of second-table patent publications.

42. The computer program according to any one of claims 37 to 40, characterized in that, The following steps are also implemented: For the plurality of first patent publications, plurality of first-disclosure patent publications or plurality of first-table patent publications and the plurality of second patent publications, plurality of second-disclosure patent publications or plurality of second-table patent publications, the ratio of the second parameter to the at least one first parameter is calculated as the fifth parameter; For the fifth parameter, a significant difference test is performed between the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first-disclosure patent publications, or the plurality of first-table patent publications and the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second-disclosure patent publications, or the plurality of second-table patent publications.

43. A computer program, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: The first step involves collecting the value of a first parameter for multiple electronically digitized first patent gazettes, multiple first-published patent gazettes, or multiple first-table patent gazettes of the first applicant or the first patentee. The first parameter is at least one of the following parameters selected from each of the multiple first patent gazettes, multiple first-published patent gazettes, or multiple first-table patent gazettes: total number of claims, total number of claim classes, total number of independent claims, total number of dependent claims, maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class, total number of claims in claim classes identical or related to the specified technology or specified service, total number of independent claims in claim classes identical or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, and total number of dependent claims in claim classes identical or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service; and The second step involves collecting the value of a second parameter for multiple electronically digitized second patent gazettes, multiple second-published patent gazettes, or multiple second-published patent gazettes of the second applicant or the second patentee. The second parameter is at least one of the following parameters selected from each of the multiple second patent gazettes, multiple second-published patent gazettes, or second-published patent gazettes: the total number of claims, the total number of claim categories, the total number of independent claims, the total number of dependent claims, the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim category, the number of independent claims in claim categories that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, and the number of dependent claims in claim categories that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service.

44. The computer program according to claim 42, characterized in that, It also includes a third step, in which a significance test is performed on the difference between the value of the first parameter collected through the first step and the value of the second parameter collected through the second step.

45. The computer program according to claim 42 or 43, characterized in that, When the first parameter is the total number of claims in the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of first published patent publications, the second parameter is the total number of claims in the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second published patent publications; When the first parameter is the total number of claim categories of the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of first public patent publications, the second parameter is the total number of claim categories of the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second public patent publications; When the first parameter is the total number of independent claims in the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of first published patent publications, the second parameter is the total number of independent claims in the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second published patent publications; When the first parameter is the total number of dependent claims of the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of first published patent publications, the second parameter is the total number of dependent claims of the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second published patent publications; When the first parameter is the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim category of the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of first published patent publications, the second parameter is the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim category of the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second disclosed patent publications, or the plurality of second published patent publications; When the first parameter is the total number of claims in the multiple first patent publications, multiple first public patent publications, or multiple first public patent publications that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, the second parameter is the total number of claims in the multiple second patent publications, multiple second public patent publications, or multiple second public patent publications that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service. When the first parameter is the total number of claims in the multiple first patent publications, multiple first public patent publications, or multiple first public patent publications that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, the second parameter is the total number of claims in the multiple second patent publications, multiple second public patent publications, or multiple second public patent publications that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service. When the first parameter is the total number of dependent claims in the multiple first patent publications, multiple first public patent publications, or multiple first public patent publications that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, the second parameter is the total number of dependent claims in the multiple second patent publications, multiple second public patent publications, or multiple second public patent publications that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service.

46. ​​A computer program, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: The first step is to determine the first enterprise, the first person or the first organization that sells or manufactures the specified goods or implements the specified services specified by the user through a first electronic database or Internet search, as well as the market share of the first enterprise, the first person or the first organization. The second step involves retrieving multiple first patent gazettes, multiple first-published patent gazettes, or multiple first-published patent gazettes from a second electronic database or via the Internet. These multiple first patent gazettes, multiple first-published patent gazettes, or multiple first-published patent gazettes have the first enterprise, the first individual, or the first institution as the first applicant or patentee, and their claims include claims with the same or related claim categories as the specified goods or the specified services. as well as The third step involves collecting the values ​​of at least one parameter for each of the multiple first patent gazettes, multiple first published patent gazettes, or multiple first public patent gazettes extracted in the second step: the total number of claims, the total number of claim categories, the total number of independent claims, the total number of dependent claims, the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim category, the total number of claims in claim categories that are the same as or related to the specified technology or specified service, the total number of independent claims in claim categories that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, and the total number of dependent claims in claim categories that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service.

47. The computer program according to claim 45, characterized in that, It also includes the following steps: The fourth step involves using a third electronic database or internet search to determine the market share of a second enterprise, second person, or second institution that is different from the first enterprise, first individual, or first institution in selling or manufacturing the specified goods or providing the specified services. The fifth step involves collecting the values ​​of at least one of the following parameters for each of the plurality of second patent publications or the plurality of second-published patent publications extracted in the fourth step: the total number of claims, the total number of claim categories, the total number of independent claims, the total number of dependent claims, the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim, the total number of claims of claim categories that are the same as or related to the specified technology or specified service, the total number of independent claims of claim categories that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology or specified service, and the total number of dependent claims of claim categories that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology or specified service. as well as The sixth step is to perform a significance test on the difference between the value of the at least one parameter collected in the third step and the value of the at least one parameter collected in the fifth step.

48. A computer program, characterized in that, Collect at least one of the following from the claims of multiple electronically digitized patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple published patent gazettes: the total number of defining elements and the total number of designated phrases. The total number of defining elements is the number of defining elements in the claims, and the total number of designated phrases is the number of designated phrases used to designate the defining elements that have appeared in the claims and to record the relationship between them and other defining elements.

49. The computer program according to claim 47, characterized in that, Collect both the total number of the specified elements and the total number of the specified words and phrases.

50. The computer program according to claim 47, characterized in that, The collection of at least one of the total number of the defining elements and the total number of the specified terms is carried out for the independent claims of the claim.

51. A computer program, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: The first step is to collect at least one parameter from the claims of multiple first patent gazettes, multiple first published patent gazettes, or multiple first public patent gazettes digitized by the first applicant or the first patentee, including the total number of limiting elements and the total number of designated phrases. The total number of limiting elements is the number of limiting elements in the claims, and the total number of designated phrases is the number of designated phrases used to specify the limiting elements that have appeared in the claims and to record the relationship between them and other limiting elements. The second step involves collecting at least one parameter from the claims of multiple second patent gazettes, multiple second published patent gazettes, or multiple second public patent gazettes digitized by the second applicant or the second patentee: the total number of limiting elements and the total number of designated phrases. The total number of limiting elements is the number of limiting elements in the claims, and the total number of designated phrases is the number of designated phrases used to specify the limiting elements that have appeared in the claims and to record the relationship between them and other limiting elements. as well as The third step is to perform a significance test on the difference between the value of the at least one parameter collected in the first step and the value of the at least one parameter collected in the second step.

52. The computer program according to claim 50, characterized in that, In the first step, both the total number of the defined elements and the total number of the specified words and phrases are collected. In the second step, both the total number of the defined elements and the total number of the specified words and phrases are collected.

53. The computer program according to claim 50 or 51, characterized in that, It also includes a fourth step, in which a significance test is performed on the difference between the ratio of the number of defined elements to the number of specified words and sentences collected in the first step and the ratio of the number of defined elements to the number of specified words and sentences collected in the second step.

54. A computer program, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: The steps to identify enterprises, individuals, or institutions that may sell or transfer at least a portion of their business to other enterprises, individuals, or institutions, or that may acquire or transfer at least a portion of their business from other enterprises, individuals, or institutions, or that may become the object of investment, financing, stock trading, or bond trading. The extraction steps, such as extracting patent gazettes, involve extracting multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple published patent gazettes that contain claims of the same or related categories as the designated goods, designated technology, or designated services in their claims. The designated goods, designated technology, or designated services are goods, technologies, or services related to the at least part of the business. as well as The first parameter collection step involves collecting at least one of multiple first parameters for the multiple patent gazettes, the multiple published patent gazettes, or the multiple published patent gazettes. The multiple first parameters include: the total number of claims, the total number of claim categories, the total number of independent claims, the total number of dependent claims, the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim category, the total number of claims in claim categories that are identical or related to the specified technology or specified service, the total number of independent claims in claim categories that are identical or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service, and the total number of dependent claims in claim categories that are identical or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service.

55. The computer program according to claim 53, characterized in that, It also includes a second parameter collection step, in which the number of cited documents is collected as a second parameter for the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes or the plurality of published patent gazettes. The number of cited documents is the number of prior art documents cited by the patent office in the examination of the plurality of patent applications corresponding to the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes or the plurality of published patent gazettes.

56. The computer program according to claim 54, characterized in that, It also includes a first calculation step, in which a significance probability is calculated as a third parameter based on the correlation between the value of the second parameter and the value of the at least one first parameter.

57. The computer program according to claim 54, characterized in that, It also includes a second calculation step, in which a correlation coefficient is calculated as a fourth parameter based on the correlation between the values ​​of the second parameter and the at least one first parameter.

58. The computer program according to claim 54, characterized in that, It also includes a third calculation step, in which the ratio of the second parameter to the at least one first parameter is calculated as a fifth parameter.

59. The computer program according to claim 53, characterized in that, It also includes a first evaluation step, in which the at least one first parameter is used as an evaluation standard to evaluate the enterprise, individual or organization determined through the enterprise determination step.

60. The computer program according to claim 54, characterized in that, It also includes a first evaluation step, in which the second parameter is used as the evaluation standard to evaluate the enterprises, individuals or institutions determined through the enterprise determination step.

61. The computer program according to claim 55, characterized in that, It also includes a first evaluation step, in which the third parameter is used as the evaluation standard to evaluate the enterprises, individuals or institutions determined through the enterprise determination step.

62. The computer program according to claim 56, characterized in that, It also includes a first evaluation step, in which the fourth parameter is used as the evaluation standard to evaluate the enterprises, individuals or institutions determined through the enterprise determination step.

63. The computer program according to claim 57, characterized in that, It also includes a first evaluation step, in which the fifth parameter is used as the evaluation standard to evaluate the enterprises, individuals or institutions determined through the enterprise determination step.

64. The computer program according to any one of claims 58 to 62, characterized in that, The first evaluation step includes comparing the results with those obtained from a second evaluation step that uses the enterprise, individual, or institution as a benchmark.

65. A computer program, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: Enterprises, etc., determine the steps to identify enterprises, individuals or institutions that may sell or transfer at least a portion of their business to other enterprises, individuals or institutions, or that may acquire or transfer at least a portion of their business from other enterprises, individuals or institutions. The patent gazette extraction steps involve extracting multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple published patent gazettes whose claims contain the same or related claim categories as the designated goods, designated technology, or designated services, wherein the designated goods, designated technology, or designated services are goods, technologies, or services related to the at least part of the business; and The collection step involves collecting at least one of the total number of limiting elements and the total number of designated phrases from the claims of each of the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of publicly available patent gazettes. The total number of limiting elements is the number of limiting elements in the claims, and the total number of designated phrases is the number of designated phrases used to designate the existing limiting elements of the claims and to record the relationship between them and other limiting elements.

66. The computer program according to claim 64, characterized in that, In the collection step, the total number of defining elements and the total number of specified terms are collected for the claims of the claim category.

67. The computer program according to claim 64 or 65, characterized in that, Collect both the total number of the specified elements and the total number of the specified words and phrases.

68. The computer program according to any one of claims 64 to 66, characterized in that, The collection of at least one of the total number of the defining elements and the total number of the specified terms is carried out for the independent claims of the claim.

69. The computer program according to any one of claims 64 to 67, characterized in that, It also includes a calculation step, in which the ratio of the total number of the defined elements to the total number of the specified words and phrases is calculated.

70. The computer program according to any one of claims 64 to 68, characterized in that, It also includes a verification step in which a significant difference test is performed between at least one of the number of defined elements and the number of specified phrases for the benchmark enterprise, individual or organization and at least one of the number of defined elements and the number of specified phrases obtained through the collection step for the enterprise, individual or organization determined through the enterprise or other steps.

71. The computer program according to claim 68, characterized in that, It also includes a testing step in which a significant difference test is performed between the ratio of the benchmark enterprise, individual or institution and the ratio obtained by the calculation step for the enterprise, individual or institution determined by the steps such as the enterprise.

72. A computer program, characterized in that, For each of the multiple electronically digitized patent publications, multiple published patent publications, or multiple publicly available patent publications, determine whether there is a record or a number of records based on experimental results in at least one of the claims, embodiments, and examples.

73. A computer program, characterized in that, For each of the multiple patent publications, multiple published patent publications, or multiple published patent publications digitized in electronic form, determine whether a numerical value or its quantity exists in at least one of the claims, embodiments, and embodiments.

74. A computer program, characterized in that, For each of the multiple patent publications, multiple published patent publications, or multiple publicly available patent publications digitized in electronic form, determine whether there is a record or quantity of a numerical value based on experimental results in at least one of the claims, embodiments, and examples.

75. A computer program, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: The first step involves collecting at least one of a plurality of first parameters for multiple electronically digitized patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple publicly available patent gazettes. The plurality of first parameters include: the total number of claims related to the claims of each of the plurality of patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple publicly available patent gazettes; the total number of claim classes; the total number of independent claims; the total number of dependent claims; the maximum number of independent claims within the same claim class; the total number of claims in claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service; the total number of independent claims in claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service; and the total number of dependent claims in claim classes that are the same as or associated with the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service. The second step is to collect the number of cited documents as a second parameter for the multiple patent gazettes, the multiple published patent gazettes, or the multiple published patent gazettes. The number of cited documents is the number of prior art documents cited by the patent office in the examination of multiple patent applications corresponding to the multiple patent gazettes, the multiple published patent gazettes, or the multiple published patent gazettes. The third step involves collecting at least one of the total number of limiting elements and the total number of designated phrases from the claims of each of the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of publicly available patent gazettes. The total number of limiting elements is the number of limiting elements in the claims, and the total number of designated phrases is the number of designated phrases used to specify the existing limiting elements of the claims and to record the relationship between them and other limiting elements. The fourth step is to determine, for each of the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of publicly available patent gazettes, whether there is a record or a numerical record based on experimental results in the claims, embodiments, or embodiments, or the quantity thereof.

76. The computer program according to claim 74, characterized in that, It also includes the following steps: The fifth step involves extracting the multiple patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple published patent gazettes by including multiple first patent gazettes, multiple first published patent gazettes, or multiple first published patent gazettes in which the applicant or patentee is the first applicant or the first patentee, and multiple second patent gazettes, multiple second published patent gazettes, or multiple second published patent gazettes in which the applicant or patentee is the second applicant or the second patentee. as well as The sixth step involves comparing the results obtained through at least one of the first, second, third, and fourth steps, or the evaluation based on the results, between the plurality of first patent publications, the plurality of first-published patent publications, or the plurality of first-publication patent publications and the plurality of second patent publications, the plurality of second-published patent publications, or the plurality of second-publication patent publications.

77. The computer program according to claim 74, characterized in that, It also includes a seventh step, in which a score is given for the results obtained through at least one of the first step, the second step, the third step, and the fourth step, or for the evaluation based on the results.

78. The computer program according to claim 76, characterized in that, In the seventh step, the scoring is performed using the deviation value.

79. The computer program according to claim 74, characterized in that, The method also includes an eighth step, in which at least one of the first, second, third, and fourth steps is performed on the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of publicly available patent gazettes that contain the applicant or patentee, or the patent gazettes that are the same as or related to the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service. The deviation value is calculated according to the applicant or patentee, or the specified goods, specified technology, or specified service.

80. The computer program according to claim 75, characterized in that, It also includes a ninth step, in which the result of the seventh step is visualized.

81. A computer program, characterized in that, have: The computer program as described in claim 1, claim 37, claim 50, claim 53, claim 64, or claim 74; and Functions for collecting enterprise information.

82. A computer program, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: The parameter collection step involves collecting at least one parameter from at least one of the claims and description of a patent or patent application. The parsing step involves parsing the at least one parameter obtained through the parameter collection step; as well as The enterprise selection process, based at least on the results obtained through the analysis steps, involves selecting target companies for investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or mergers and acquisitions, or creating a portfolio of investment products.

83. A computer program, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: The parameter collection step involves collecting at least one parameter from each of multiple electronically digitized patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple publicly available patent gazettes; and The enterprise information collection step involves collecting at least a portion of the enterprise information of the applicant enterprises recorded in the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of public patent gazettes.

84. The computer program according to claim 82, characterized in that, It also includes the following steps: The parameter parsing step parses the at least one parameter collected through the parameter collection step; and The enterprise output step outputs the enterprise that is the applicant as recorded in the patent gazette, published patent gazette or public patent gazette, which has obtained an evaluation of at least a predetermined value in at least one evaluation item through the parameter parsing step.

85. The computer program according to claim 83, characterized in that, It also includes a selection step, in which the enterprise output by the enterprise output step is selected as the target enterprise for financing, investment, stock trading, bond trading or merger and acquisition.

86. The computer program according to claim 82, characterized in that, It also includes the following steps: The enterprise evaluation step evaluates enterprises based on the enterprise information obtained through the enterprise information collection step; and The enterprise extraction step extracts enterprises that have a predetermined value or higher in at least one evaluation item used as a judgment criterion in the enterprise evaluation step. The parameter collection step is performed on the enterprises extracted through the enterprise extraction step.

87. The computer program according to claim 85, characterized in that, It also includes the following steps: The parameter parsing step parses the at least one parameter collected through the parameter collection step; and The enterprise output step outputs enterprises that have achieved a predetermined value or higher in at least one evaluation item during the parameter parsing step.

88. A computer program, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: The parameter collection step involves collecting multiple parameters from multiple electronically digitized patent gazettes, multiple published patent gazettes, or multiple publicly available patent gazettes. The enterprise information collection step involves collecting at least a portion of the enterprise information of the enterprise listed as the applicant in the plurality of patent gazettes, the plurality of published patent gazettes, or the plurality of public patent gazettes; The data analysis step involves analyzing the multiple parameters collected through the parameter collection step and evaluating multiple evaluation items for the multiple patent gazettes, the multiple published patent gazettes, or the multiple published patent gazettes. as well as The enterprise selection step involves selecting at least one enterprise for each or more of the multiple evaluation items.

89. The computer program according to claim 87, characterized in that, The companies selected through the company selection step are those that have achieved scores above the predetermined value in each evaluation item through the data analysis step.

90. An apparatus, characterized in that, The computer program is equipped with the computer program described in claim 1, claim 37, claim 50, claim 53, claim 64, claim 74, claim 80, claim 81, claim 82 or claim 87.

91. A method for patent evaluation, selection of target companies for investment, financing, stock trading, bond trading, or mergers and acquisitions, or a due diligence method, characterized in that, A portion of the computer program described in claim 1, claim 37, claim 50, claim 53, claim 64, claim 74, claim 80, claim 81, claim 82, or claim 87 is implemented by the user.

Images