B

6G Patent Portfolio Analyzer

2.50

Derivation Chain

Step 1 ETRI 6G communications technology international presentation
→
Step 2 Accelerating 6G standardization competition
→
Step 3 Demand for 6G Standard Essential Patent (SEP) analysis
→
Step 4 6G SEP portfolio automated analysis SaaS

Problem

Domestic telecom equipment and component companies (50–500 employees) need to pre-analyze whether their patents qualify as Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) as 6G standardization progresses, but mapping correspondences between 3GPP standard documents and their own patent claims costs 2–5 million KRW (~$1,500–$3,750) per patent and takes 2–4 weeks per Patent attorney. Delays in building an SEP portfolio put companies at a disadvantage in licensing negotiations and result in lost 6G royalty revenue opportunities.

Solution

Cross-analyze 3GPP standard documents (Technical Specifications) against company patent claims using an LLM to automatically score SEP eligibility. Generate portfolio strength/weakness Reports benchmarked against competitors (Samsung, Qualcomm, Huawei, etc.) and recommend filing strategies aligned with standardization meeting schedules.

Target: Patent/IP strategy teams at telecom equipment and component companies (50–500 employees), telecom-focused Patent firms
Revenue Model: SaaS Monthly Subscription at 890,000 KRW (~$668)/enterprise account, including 50 Patent analyses/month. Overage at 10,000 KRW (~$7.50)/analysis. 15% discount for annual contracts
Ecosystem Role: Regulation
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
4.0/5
U Urgency
2.0/5
M Market
2.0/5
R Realizability
2.0/5
V Validation
3.0/5
NUMR-V Scoring System
N Novelty1-5How uncommon the service is in market context.
U Urgency1-5How urgently users need this problem solved now.
M Market1-5Market size and growth potential from proxy indicators.
R Realizability1-5Buildability for a small team with realistic constraints.
V Validation1-5Validation signal quality from competition and demand data.
Each dimension is scored 1-5 and weighted into grade S/A/B/C/D.
SaaS N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20 Senior N=.25 U=.25 M=.05 R=.30 V=.15

Feasibility (70%)

Tech Complexity
29.3/40
Data Availability
20.4/25
MVP Timeline
20.0/20
API Bonus
0.0/15
Feasibility Breakdown
Tech Complexity/ 40Difficulty of core implementation stack.
Data Availability/ 25Practical availability and cost of required data.
MVP Timeline/ 20Expected time to ship a usable MVP.
API Bonus/ 15Bonus for viable public API leverage.
Total 100 points; below 50% is filtered out.

Market Validation (54/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
14.0/20
Revenue Signals
10.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
12.0/15
Solo Buildability
3.0/10
Validation Breakdown
Competition/ 20Signal quality from competitor landscape.
Market Demand/ 20Demand proxies from search and mention patterns.
Timing/ 20Fit with current shifts in tech, behavior, and regulation.
Revenue Signals/ 15Reference evidence for monetization viability.
Pick-Axe Fit/ 15How well the concept serves participants in a trend.
Solo Buildability/ 10Practicality for lean-team implementation.
Total 100 points; below 50 is filtered out.

Technical Requirements

AI/ML [medium] Backend [medium] Frontend [low]
Dashboard