For startups and mid-sized companies with cross-border ambitions, international patent protection is a critical consideration. Two primary filing routes dominate the conversation: the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) system and direct national filings. Each offers distinct advantages, depending on your commercial priorities, budget constraints, and long-term IP strategy.
This article provides expert insight to help you evaluate the right international filing strategy for your business.
Why International Patent Protection Matters
In today’s global economy, innovations are rarely confined to a single jurisdiction. Whether you’re launching a software platform in North America, scaling a medical device in the EU, or manufacturing a component in Asia, a domestic patent alone won’t protect your entire market share.
Securing international patent rights enables you to:
- Deter foreign copycats and infringers
- Preserve licensing and joint venture opportunities
- Strengthen your position in M&A or fundraising discussions
- Protect export-driven revenue streams
PCT Route: Centralized Filing Strategy
The PCT system, administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), allows you to file a single “international application” that effectively reserves your right to file in over 150 member countries.
Key Advantages:
Centralized process: One application in one language, with one set of formalities.
Deferral of costs: You have up to 30–31 months from your priority date to enter national phases, giving you time to assess market potential and raise capital.
Preliminary review: You receive an International Search Report (ISR) and a Written Opinion, which provide insight into patentability before committing to national filings.
Ideal For:
- Startups seeking time to validate market traction before committing more funds to filings
- Businesses targeting multiple jurisdictions, usually 3-4 or more, though are uncertain which jurisdiction will yield commercial success
- Entities needing time for licensing or investment discussions
Direct National Filing: Targeted Market Approach
This approach involves filing patent applications directly in individual countries or regions (e.g., U.S., EPO, China) within 12 months of your first priority filing under the Paris Convention.
Key Advantages:
Faster protection: Particularly useful if immediate enforcement is necessary in a key jurisdiction
Lower upfront fees: Avoids PCT filing costs when targeting only one or two countries
Strategic focus: Direct filings may make sense when IP budgets are tight and target markets are limited
Ideal For:
- Companies with a clear commercial focus in only 1–2 foreign markets
- Businesses requiring rapid patent prosecution or enforcement
- IP-savvy enterprises with counsel in specific jurisdictions
Hybrid Filing Strategies
Some applicants may even employ both strategies in parallel. For example, if the United States or Europe is the largest commercial market, a direct national filing may be pursued here. Concurrently, the PCT application may be filed to preserve the opportunity down the road to file a patent application in one or more other countries around the world.
Strategic Considerations for Different Business Stages
Startups with an uncertain product-market fit or funding timelines often benefit from the PCT route due to cost deferral and flexibility.
Mature SMEs with clear strategic markets may prefer direct filings to streamline costs and timelines.
Hybrid approaches — when gaining patentable rights to enforce against third parties in a key jurisdiction(s) is preferred along with a longer runway to potentially pursue protection in other jurisdictions. Costs may be slightly higher.
Making the Right Strategic Choice
International patent filings are not one-size-fits-all. A thoughtful, commercially aligned strategy can preserve capital, support business objectives, and enhance asset value over time. Whether you pursue the PCT route or opt for direct national filings, expert guidance ensures that your choices align with your IP and business goals. Be strategic, not reactive in your approach to IP.
The decision between PCT and direct national filing should align with your business model, market priorities, and capital allocation strategy. Companies with global ambitions but uncertain market validation often find PCT’s flexibility invaluable, while those with clearly defined target markets may prefer the efficiency of direct filings.
Considering international patent filings? We advise startups and global businesses on cost-effective, jurisdiction-specific filing strategies – including PCT applications, direct filings, and hybrid approaches. Contact the CrossBorder IP team to schedule a strategy session tailored to your technology and growth plan.