IP Protection
Intellectual Property Protection in the United States
The US has the world's most developed IP framework, with federal trade secret protection under the DTSA, a first-to-file patent system, and growing acceptance of blockchain evidence. Understanding how to leverage these protections is critical for any innovator operating in the American market.
Framework
IP Protection in the United States
The United States offers a comprehensive IP protection framework spanning federal and state law. Patents are governed by Title 35 of the US Code and administered by the USPTO. Trade secrets received federal protection in 2016 through the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA), supplementing existing state-level protections under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA) adopted by 48 states. Copyright is automatic upon fixation, and trademarks are protected through both common law use and federal registration under the Lanham Act. For innovations that are difficult to reverse-engineer, trade secrets often provide stronger and cheaper protection than patents — without requiring public disclosure.
Trade Secrets
Trade Secret Law in the United States
The Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) of 2016 created a federal civil cause of action for trade secret misappropriation, allowing companies to file in federal court regardless of which state the theft occurred in.
Under the DTSA, a trade secret is any form of information that derives independent economic value from not being generally known and is subject to reasonable efforts to maintain its secrecy. This broad definition covers formulas, patterns, compilations, programs, devices, methods, techniques, and processes.
The DTSA provides powerful remedies including injunctive relief, damages (including exemplary damages up to 2x for wilful misappropriation), and attorney fees. It also includes an ex parte seizure provision for extraordinary circumstances.
State trade secret laws under the UTSA remain in effect alongside the DTSA. Most states have adopted some version of the UTSA, though notable differences exist — New York, for example, relies on common law rather than the UTSA.
Reasonable measures to maintain secrecy are a prerequisite for trade secret protection. Blockchain timestamps from immut provide documented evidence that you treated information as confidential and established ownership at specific points in time.
The Economic Espionage Act (1996) provides criminal penalties for trade secret theft, including up to 10 years imprisonment and $5 million in fines for individuals, reinforcing the seriousness of trade secret protection in the US.
Patents
Patent System Overview
Typical Cost
$15,000 - $50,000+
Including filing, prosecution, and attorney fees
Timeline
18-24 months (utility patent)
From application to grant
Process Steps
Conduct a prior art search to assess patentability ($2,000-$5,000).
Draft and file a patent application with the USPTO — utility, design, or provisional.
USPTO assigns an examiner who reviews the application (typically 12-18 months wait).
Respond to office actions — most applications receive at least one rejection requiring amendment.
Patent is granted upon allowance; maintenance fees required at 3.5, 7.5, and 11.5 years.
The US moved to a first-inventor-to-file system under the America Invents Act (2011), making early documentation of invention dates critical.
Legal Framework
Key Legislation and Case Law
Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA)
(2016)Federal law creating a civil cause of action for trade secret misappropriation. Allows filing in federal court and provides injunctive relief, damages, and ex parte seizure orders.
America Invents Act
(2011)Moved the US from first-to-invent to first-inventor-to-file, making timestamped evidence of creation dates more important than ever for establishing patent priority.
Economic Espionage Act
(1996)Federal criminal statute penalising trade secret theft. Up to 10 years imprisonment and $5M fines for individuals; up to $10M for organisations.
Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA)
(1979)Model legislation adopted by 48 states providing a unified framework for trade secret protection at the state level, including definitions, remedies, and statutes of limitations.
Federal Rules of Evidence
(Ongoing)Rules 901 and 902 govern authentication of electronic evidence in federal courts. Blockchain records can be authenticated as self-authenticating business records under Rule 902(14).
Waymo v. Uber (2018)
(2018)Landmark trade secret case where Waymo alleged Uber stole LiDAR technology. Settled for $245M, highlighting the enormous value and vulnerability of tech trade secrets.
Blockchain in Courts
Blockchain Evidence in the United States
Blockchain evidence is admissible in US federal and state courts
Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 901(b)(9) allows authentication of electronic evidence through evidence describing a process or system and showing it produces an accurate result — directly applicable to blockchain timestamps.
Several US states have enacted blockchain-specific legislation. Vermont (2016), Arizona (2017), and others recognise blockchain records as admissible evidence, with some creating a presumption of authenticity.
The US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia accepted blockchain evidence in a copyright case (Mediachain, 2019), setting a positive precedent for blockchain timestamps.
Under Rule 902(14), certified records generated by an electronic process can be self-authenticating, reducing the burden of proving blockchain timestamp authenticity.
immut
How immut Helps in the United States
Establish prior art dates that satisfy the first-inventor-to-file standard under the America Invents Act — critical for patent priority disputes.
Document reasonable measures to maintain trade secret secrecy, a key requirement under both the DTSA and state UTSA laws.
Create court-admissible blockchain timestamps that meet Federal Rules of Evidence standards for electronic evidence authentication.
Provide 99.5% cost savings compared to US patent filing, with instant protection that takes 60 seconds instead of 18-24 months.
Support trade secret audit trails that demonstrate ongoing confidentiality measures — essential for DTSA claims.
Generate blockchain certificates that serve as evidence in both federal and state proceedings across all 50 states.
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
Is blockchain evidence accepted in US courts?
Yes. Blockchain evidence is admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence. Several states including Vermont, Arizona, and Ohio have enacted legislation specifically recognising blockchain records. Federal courts have accepted blockchain timestamps as electronic evidence under Rules 901 and 902.
How does immut help with DTSA compliance?
The DTSA requires that trade secret holders take 'reasonable measures' to maintain secrecy. immut provides timestamped proof that you identified, documented, and protected your trade secrets at specific dates — creating an evidence trail that demonstrates these reasonable measures in federal court.
Can immut timestamps establish patent priority in the US?
While immut timestamps don't replace a patent filing, they provide critical evidence of invention dates under the first-inventor-to-file system. They can establish prior art, prove conception dates in interference proceedings, and support trade secret protection as an alternative or complement to patents.
How much does US patent protection cost compared to immut?
A US utility patent typically costs $15,000-$50,000+ and takes 18-24 months. immut provides instant blockchain-verified protection starting free, with Professional plans at $29/month. For innovations better suited to trade secret protection, immut is over 99% cheaper.
Does immut work for trade secrets in all 50 states?
Yes. immut's blockchain timestamps are valid evidence in all US states. Whether your state follows the UTSA, common law (like New York), or has blockchain-specific legislation, the cryptographic proof provided by immut meets evidentiary standards nationwide.
Protect Your IP in the United States
Get blockchain-verified proof of your intellectual property in 60 seconds. Court-admissible in the United States and recognised internationally.