Stats
Actions
Tags
From legal-ops
Intellectual property protection workflows: patent landscape analysis, freedom-to-operate (FTO) preliminary assessment, trademark monitoring, copyright and OSS licence compliance, and IP clause review within contracts. Produces research scaffolding for IP counsel review.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/legal-ops:ip-protectionThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Use when: assessing technology landscape before product launch, investment
Use when: assessing technology landscape before product launch, investment decision, or patent filing strategy.
Prompt structure: /legal-brief topic:"patent landscape analysis" subject:"[technology description]" key-competitors:"[named entities]" scope:"[date range]" jurisdictions:"[US, EU, UK, etc.]"
Output includes:
MANDATORY GOVERNANCE NOTE: This output is a RESEARCH SUMMARY, not a freedom-to-operate opinion. A qualified IP attorney must review before any product launch or investment decision that relies on FTO assumptions.
Use when: preparing research scaffolding for IP attorney to assess FTO.
Output structure:
MANDATORY GOVERNANCE NOTE: This output is preliminary research scaffolding ONLY. It is NOT an FTO opinion. FTO opinions are privileged legal documents signed by qualified IP counsel. Never rely on agent output alone for a product launch decision.
Use when: monitoring for infringement of registered or pending marks.
Prompt structure: /legal-brief topic:"trademark monitoring" mark:"[your mark]" class:"[Nice classification]" jurisdiction:"[jurisdictions]"
Monitoring dimensions:
Output:
OSS licence hierarchy (most to least restrictive):
ESCALATION TRIGGER: Any GPL/AGPL component in a proprietary product -> escalate to IP counsel immediately.
Always check:
Who owns work product created during the engagement? RED FLAG: Vendor claims ownership of deliverables created using our data, our systems, or our specifications.
What licence does each party get to the other's IP? Check: scope, exclusivity, sublicensing, term, geography, termination consequences.
Are there obligations to assign IP to the other party? RED FLAG: Broad assignment clauses capturing pre-existing IP or improvements.
What IP indemnity is provided? STANDARD: Mutual indemnification for third-party IP infringement. RED FLAG: One-sided indemnity; no indemnity in a technology contract.
IP RESEARCH BRIEF
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Type: [Patent Landscape / Trademark Monitor / FTO Research]
Technology: [technology area]
Jurisdictions: [list]
Period: [date range]
FINDINGS:
[numbered list of key findings with relevance assessment]
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
[numbered list -- each marked: Immediate / Within 30 days / Monitor]
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
NOTE: This is research scaffolding, not a freedom-to-operate
opinion. All findings require review by qualified IP counsel.
npx claudepluginhub panaversity/agentfactory-business-plugins --plugin legal-opsPerforms structured freedom-to-operate triage for products/features, building claim-charts against plausible patents and flagging open questions for patent counsel review.
Maps the IP landscape for a technology domain: patent clusters, white spaces, competitor portfolios, and freedom-to-operate risks. Use before R&D, market entry, due diligence, or patent filing.
Systematically verifies that a company or individual properly owns their intellectual property assets, including patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets.