The North Star IP Strategy: Wilson Sonsini Insights on Patenting V10, Not V1
Building a deep technology company—one at the intersection of robotics, AI, and the physical world—requires more than just engineering brilliance. It demands a foundational strategy for protecting that innovation. Many founders, focused on product development, skip the crucial legal and intellectual property (IP) planning until they are forced to confront it during a funding round or a competitive threat. Understanding how to build an IP strategy that matches a company's business model is the legal backbone that founders skip until it hurts.
On Episode 106 of The Machine Minds Show, host Greg Toroosian sits down with Ryan Smith, a partner at Wilson Sonsini, a law firm renowned for supporting innovative companies from their very first day through IPO. Ryan, who built his career in patent litigation, shares an intimate view into why IP is the strategic element that ultimately determines a deep tech company's long-term success.
Ryan Smith: Partner at Wilson Sonsini
Ryan’s career shift from an electrical engineering major to an IP lawyer began unexpectedly during the late 1990s internet boom, when he was tasked by his startup employer with developing a patent strategy. This project of interviewing and cold-calling IP attorneys led him to law school and ultimately to Wilson Sonsini, where he has worked for over 22 years, constantly exposed to fascinating, cutting-edge ideas that people never would have imagined.
IP Strategy: The North Star Mandate
Ryan emphasizes that for deep tech founders, the legal strategy cannot rely on a generic template used for a software-as-a-service (SaaS) business, because the approach for a robotics company is inherently different. There is no single blueprint that works for every company.
Patenting the Future
The most crucial advice for deep tech founders is to avoid only patenting the v1 widget currently being shipped. An effective strategy begins with the company’s future state: where it will be in 5 or 10 years. The focus must be on protecting the core technology that will power product Versions 2, 3, and 10 to secure a long-term competitive moat, especially since a patent's lifespan can be 20 years.
The Danger of Tunnel Vision
Investor pressure for immediate commercial traction and revenue generation can inadvertently lead founders to focus their IP protection solely on the initial product offering. Since a patent's lifespan can be 20 years, only protecting the early revenue-generating product (V1) can lead to a patent portfolio that is irrelevant ten years later. Founders must maintain a vision of the future to ensure their IP covers their grander ambition.
The Flexibility to Pivot
Great founding teams have a strong vision but also the flexibility to pivot when market timing or cost alignment is off. Ryan cites the historical example of SanDisk, whose founders had the vision for solid-state drives in the late 1980s but were too early for the market. They were able to pivot to pioneer memory cards for digital cameras, while always maintaining the vision to eventually return to solid-state drives. This flexibility—being able to switch direction while maintaining the overall north star—is a trait of successful founders. Ryan suggests robotics companies may follow a similar path, starting with broad visions and narrowing to a specific application to gain traction before branching out.
The Investor Lens and Regulatory Headwinds
Investors view a company's IP not only for its defensibility but also for its strategic alignment. They are looking for a clear signal, diligence, transparency, and a material, analyzable moat.
Patents as Marketing and Residual Value
Patents serve as a marketing asset, attracting investors who expect a "technology company" to have protected IP. Furthermore, a substantial patent portfolio can provide residual value if the business fails (Plan B). While founders focus on winning, investors seek this residual value by licensing or selling the IP portfolio. Companies that die out are often left with only their patent portfolio, which can become the genesis of future legal disputes.
Asymmetry and Risk
The lack of patents creates an asymmetry when competitors are actively investing in IP. This scenario is a recipe for disputes and legal battles down the road. Patents, by contrast, offer transparency for investor diligence, providing material they can analyze. If a company claims to be a technology leader but does not have any IP, investors may view it with skepticism.
Regulatory Fog Ahead
The deep tech landscape faces regulatory fog, making long-term planning difficult due to policy uncertainty, especially with frequent changes in the executive branch. Founders must make bets about what the landscape will look like in four to eight years. Specific concerns include safety protocols and regulations in robotics and issues of privacy and copyright infringement concerning training data in AI. Founders may need to make a bet on how future copyright law will affect their business models.
The Operational Necessity of Early Legal Counsel
Many startups view in-house legal counsel as a cost center, delaying the hire to save payroll and prioritize engineering. Ryan argues this is a costly mistake that prevents holistic planning and wastes executive time.
The CEO/CFO Time Sink
By delaying the hiring of an in-house attorney, the CEO or CFO is forced to become the quarterback for outside law firms and complex legal issues. This consumes their valuable time, preventing them from focusing on core business development and long-term strategy. Ryan notes that many lawsuits could have been avoided entirely if both parties had spent a little more time seeking high-level advice early on.
The Holistically Aware Partner
Companies need a dedicated person who can look at the business holistically, anticipating pitfalls the company will face in two to three years, not just managing immediate problems. Finding a general counsel, even on a part-time or fractional basis, allows the legal partner to become truly immersed in the business and serve that crucial function.
Hiring for the Destination
Legal department needs are highly dependent on the nature of the business (SaaS needs contract negotiation; drug discovery needs patent prosecution). Therefore, the first General Counsel must be hired with an eye toward the company's ultimate destination. For example, if the goal is an IPO, that first hire should have experience guiding a company through that specific process to ensure the legal groundwork is correctly buttoned up early.
The Unintended Future
When discussing the future of technology, Ryan expresses his interest in the unintentional consequences that new technologies create, citing how advancements in computing have changed life completely since the 1980s.
For robotics, the potential long-term benefits are often unanticipated. Ryan notes that in an urban landscape, over 50% of the land is often used just for storing cars in parking lots. The widespread implementation of self-driving cars could dramatically change the need for storage, freeing up massive amounts of real estate for other purposes. He suggests that robotics will lead to similar aftershocks that are currently unappreciated.
Bonus Round Pioneer Vision
Ryan reveals that, outside of law, his career choice would be a professional rock drummer, a pursuit he recently got back into after a long break. His dream client would be a future tech pioneer that no one else believes in, someone he can connect with personally and who has a truly interesting idea. He wants to be the lawyer who makes a difference for that visionary when no one else is jumping up and down to help.
Key Takeaways
Proactive IP Strategy
IP protection must be established early, as waiting until the product is released is often too late for effective protection.
Patent the Future
Do not just patent the current product (V1). Protect the core technological innovation that will power product versions V2, V3, and beyond.
Investor Moat
Patents signal competence, aid in investor diligence, and provide a clear competitive moat that reduces the risk of future disputes.
Early Legal Counsel
Hiring a fractional or part-time GC saves the CEO/CFO's time and prevents exponentially more costly legal mistakes down the line.
Hiring for the Destination
The first legal hire should have a background that aligns with the company's ultimate goal (e.g., IPO or regulatory compliance).
Unanticipated Benefits
Robotics will likely have unintended positive consequences on areas like urban planning (parking lot space) that are not yet factored into the business case.
Conclusion
Ryan Smith’s message reinforces that for visionary deep tech founders, the legal framework is not an afterthought. It is a core component of the business plan. By building an IP strategy that looks five to 10 years into the future and bringing in strategic legal expertise early, founders can secure their competitive position, accelerate investor interest, and build a truly durable and defensible company.
The Future is Here
Listen to the full conversation on Apple Podcast here: Episode 106 | Trusted Counsel for Visionaries | Ryan Smith
Subscribe to The Machine Minds Show on YouTube or follow on Instagram and Facebook
Learn more about Wilson Sonsini or connect with Ryan Smith on LinkedIn
Take Action Now!
Samson Rose specializes in identifying the rare combination of technical depth and operational urgency required to build the future of physical AI.
For Top Talent
Ready to Lead the Charge? If you are seeking a role at the cutting edge of AI, automation, and materials science, explore Exclusive Job Opportunities with Samson Rose.
For Innovative Companies
Need Specialized Leadership? To secure the scientific or operational leader required to scale your company and build a defensible legal framework, Partner with Samson Rose for Talent Acquisition today.