Capability for Recognition & Compliance

A publication may stand against the novelty of a later application by a third party, provided it was publicly available before that party's filing or priority date, discloses the subject matter in an enabling manner, and is actually taken into account in the proceedings — the relevant provisions being Art. 54 EPC or 35 U.S. Code § 102. This does not amount to an automatic bar: whether a publication is relied upon as prior art in a given case is decided by the competent authority or court.

Proofbox publications are timestamped, publicly accessible, findable and demonstrably available. They are therefore prepared according to the criteria that matter for being taken into account as prior art — including EPO G 1/92, USPTO MPEP § 2128 and WIPO PCT Rule 34.1. On expert assessment, recognition is likely, but it has not so far been confirmed by any precedent. The assessment of evidence remains, in every individual case, a matter for the competent authority or court.

Unlike static archives, Proofbox offers an end-to-end solution:

Each disclosure comes with a qualified timestamp, cryptographic hash, and public access record. This forms a robust chain of evidence that can support your claim in court or licensing negotiations. The existence of an invention at a specific point in time can thus be proven in a reliable manner. Nevertheless, this does not necessarily constitute proof of authorship or inventorship.

In fact, a defensive publication can strategically strengthen your portfolio by helping prevent third parties from monopolizing areas you deliberately establish as prior art. This is particularly valuable for freedom-to-operate (FTO) and open innovation strategies.

By disclosing your innovation through Proofbox, you establish prior art that may stand against a later patent application on the same subject matter by a third party. With regard to freedom to operate, a defensive publication can reduce the risk of future third-party patents — it establishes prior art only and, unlike a patent, does not create an exclusive right of its own. An infringement of pre-existing third-party rights may still occur despite a defensive publication.

This means you can achieve the same effect in terms of FTO without the high costs associated with filing, prosecuting, maintaining or even defending patents. For technologies you use but do not wish to actively protect, defensive publication offers an efficient and cost-effective option.

Yes. Proofbox allows for anonymous authorship without impairing the technical requirements for the publication. This protects your identity while supporting the ideas' FTO as prior art. Please note that an anonymous publication may make it harder to furnish evidence later, for instance where authorship or the date of creation has to be proven.

Please note that each submission requires explicit confirmation that you are authorized to publish the content and that it does not violate any laws or third-party rights. By uploading a disclosure, you accept full responsibility for its content and publication.

Proofbox performs no editorial or expert review of the content and assumes no liability. An automated, AI-supported abuse screening pursuant to section 3.3 of the Terms and Conditions may take place; it may be erroneous and does not relieve you of your responsibility. You undertake to indemnify Proofbox against all third-party claims in connection with your publication. Please also refer to our Terms and Conditions.

Proofbox follows the relevant standards for document integrity and long-term availability (ISO/IEC 18014, ISO/IEC 27001, ISO 14721).

Proofbox is aimed at IP managers, startups, universities and R&D departments of SMEs and corporates. The platform is designed for innovators who want to preserve freedom to operate for their ideas without navigating the cost or complexity of the patent system.

Proofbox is built specifically for the needs of IP managers. Its defining feature is discreet disclosure: the publication is made findable for search engines, while the full content stays behind a paywall and is therefore not accessible to automated competitor monitoring. Added to this are preparation according to the relevant IP frameworks, the online-only approach and the use of structured metadata.