An Introductory Guide to Patents for the U.S. Sports and Sports Tech Industry

1. Patent Decisions Should Start With Business Strategy: Not every sports or sports-tech innovation warrants patent protection. Companies should weigh an innovation’s competitive importance, product lifecycle, ability to be reverse engineered, enforceability, and expected return against the cost of obtaining and maintaining protection.
   
   
2. Early Planning and Active Portfolio Management Are Critical: Filing strategy should be aligned with product launches, seasons, and major events to avoid losing potential rights. Once protection is pursued, companies should continually evaluate improvements and new features and use tools such as continuation applications to keep coverage aligned with evolving technology and competitive threats.
   
   
3. Patents Can Create Value Well Beyond Stopping Competitors: A strategically developed portfolio can support licensing and partnerships, strengthen fundraising and M&A positioning, generate revenue, signal technological strength, and provide leverage in enforcement and commercial negotiations.

As sports and sports technology continue to evolve at an increasing pace, a thoughtful patent strategy can be a meaningful competitive advantage, helping businesses stay ahead in an increasingly crowded marketplace. At its core, a patent grants the right to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing a patented invention or design without authorisation. But a patent is not merely a legal right; it can also function as a strategic business tool used to protect a company’s competitive position, signal long-term value, and provide leverage in negotiations.

This article examines how the deliberate development and strategic monetisation of patent portfolios can help sports and sports technology businesses protect innovation, build commercial credibility, enhance enterprise value, and create new revenue opportunities. The discussion is primarily directed to U.S. patent practice and the U.S. market. Because patent strategy is jurisdiction-specific, pursuing protection internationally should account for differences in foreign practices, including prosecution procedures, patentability standards, enforcement, and maintenance obligations.

When It Is (and Isn’t) Worth Applying for Patent Protection 

A patent grants the patent holder the right, for a limited time, to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing a claimed invention or design without permission. In exchange, the patent holder agrees to publicly disclose the invention so others can understand and build on the innovation.^[1] Whether to pursue patent protection is a strategic business decision that requires consideration of a company’s broader commercial objectives and an understanding of how an innovation competes in the marketplace. Patent protection is most effective when the innovation is central to a product, platform, or service that differentiates a company’s offering from competitors, and even more so when the technology remains relevant across multiple seasons.

There are two types of patents - utility^[2] and design^[3] that provide different scopes of protection. Utility patents protect a specific function of an invention, while design patents protect the ornamental characteristic of an article. Both are ubiquitous in the sports industry, where patents frequently protect innovations in equipment design, performance apparel, footwear, wearables and sensor technology, training systems, performance measurement and analytics technology, fan engagement, and sports betting. Sports companies that are well-known worldwide - Nike (Flyknit® footwear^[4] ), Callaway (Jailbreak® golf club technology^[5] ), Peloton (connected fitness platforms^[6] ), and Garmin (GPS-enabled performance wearables^[7] ) - rely on strategic patent portfolios.

Beyond preventing direct copying, patents can serve as signals of commercial strength to investors, potential partners, and competitors. This value is important for early-stage companies seeking credibility as they enter and seek to scale in competitive markets. Patent protection is also important where competitors could independently develop or reverse engineer a technology once it becomes commercially available, positioning patents as both defensive tools in negotiations and offensive tools to deter competitors from encroaching a defined technology space. For companies contemplating fundraising, strategic partnerships, or future acquisition, a well-constructed patent portfolio may also enhance enterprise value by signalling technological depth and long-term defensibility.

Conversely, patent protection may not be the right answer where an innovation is short lived, infringement is difficult to detect or enforce, or the invention is easily designed around. For example, proprietary performance analytics models that are difficult for competitors to copy may be more appropriate for other protections (e.g., trade secrets). Obtaining and enforcing a patent can be expensive. Some seasonal sports equipment may not be worth the investment if it’s obsolete by the next season. Early consideration of whether the investment will provide a valuable return may guide the patent application process. The decision to pursue patent protection should balance the costs with how the technology will be used, commercialized, and defended.

Timing is another key consideration. In many jurisdictions, patent rights can be forfeited if an application is filed too long after public disclosure^[8] . For example, U.S. courts have held that a public presentation that discloses every aspect of a claimed invention beyond the statutory grace period, i.e., more than one year, was grounds to invalidate a patent^[9] . In sports and sports technology, timing often dictates marketing and product launches, effectively creating filing deadlines. Evaluation and alignment of filing plans with seasons, product launches, and major events (e.g., the Olympics) should be done early to avoid unintentionally losing the right to pursue patent protection. Waiting until a product proves to be commercially successful may be too late to secure meaningful patent protection.

Ultimately, whether to file a patent should be guided by a clear understanding of how the technology will be protected, commercialized, and monetized.

The Patent Process and What It Costs 

Once the decision is made to pursue patent protection, the next step is to determine how to do so strategically. Careful planning at each stage can make the difference between a hall of fame patent or a benchwarmer.

Preparation & Diligence 

The process begins with identifying the core innovations that differentiate a product, platform, or service in the marketplace. Prioritizing these core technologies helps to ensure that patent protection aligns with commercial objectives. In sports, success is built through preparation long before the spotlight appears; a principle that similarly applies to patent strategy, where early decisions often determine whether a patent delivers meaningful value.

Early diligence is critical. Understanding the existing patent landscape allows companies to assess whether an innovation is likely novel, and whether pursuing protection is worth the investment. Identifying relevant prior art (information publicly available before the innovation) may influence drafting, which aspects are emphasized, or whether filing is advisable at all. Early diligence may also reveal a gap in the technology field that is ripe for the taking. Geography is also a factor in early planning. Different legal standards, enforcement mechanisms, and business priorities often play a role in the pursuit of patent protection internationally.^[10] Applicant’s frequently rely on international treaties, such as the Paris Convention’s twelve-month priority right^[11] and the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) filing system, to coordinate multi-jurisdictional filings.

Drafting 

The application drafting process lays the groundwork for later enforcement or monetization of the patent. Drafting an application (and later during prosecution, discussed below) is where the strategic intent of an innovation is translated into legal protection. The application must describe the invention in sufficient detail while defining the boundaries of exclusivity in a way that supports future enforcement, licensing, or commercialization. This reflects the fundamental exchange of the patent system in the U.S.: in exchange for 20 years of the right of exclusivity (15 years for design patents), inventors must disclose to the public how to make and use the technology.^[12]

Central to this effort are the claims of the application, which establish the legal scope of the patent. Claim drafting requires precision. Overly broad claims may face rejection or later invalidation, while narrow claims may leave competitors ample room to avoid infringement. Finding the right balance is essential to securing protection that is defensible and commercially meaningful. The claims are supported by the remaining portions of the application. The detailed description describes how the technology works, variations and embodiments of the claimed innovation, and provides the context of why this innovation is useful. It is important to cover not only how a specific technology works, but any conceivable variations, to expand protection and strengthen future enforcement or licensing. The written description is necessary to adequately support the features and advancements described by the claims. The figures provide visual representations of the claimed subject matter. Together, the written description and figures form the foundation of the patent and help to shape the scope of the right of exclusivity for the innovation.

Filing & Prosecution 

Once the application is drafted, it can be filed with a patent office, and examination, referred to as prosecution, begins. During this phase, a patent examiner reviews the application against statutory requirements and prior art. In the United States, an application is substantively examined for patent eligible subject matter, novelty, non-obviousness, and written description support.

Examiners frequently issue office actions containing objections and rejections asserting deficiencies or citing prior art. Applicants must decide how to respond to the examiner’s position by either arguing against a rejection, amending the claims, or abandoning the application altogether. Each decision carries strategic consequences. For example, amendments change the scope of the claim and may limit the breadth of coverage, which could negatively impact the application by giving up an aspect of the technology that may be valuable to a competitor.^[13] Prosecution may involve multiple rounds of examination, continued review, or appeals,^[14] each with its own cost, timing, and strategic considerations.

The ultimate objective of prosecution is allowance. Once an application issues, the patent owner holds the right to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing the claimed invention without authorization.

Costs 

Pursuing patent protection can be long and expensive depending on the scope and strategy pursued. Expenses predictably arise throughout the process, including during drafting and preparation, paying filing and examination fees, and post-issuance maintenance. The USPTO provides a fee schedule^[15] outlining required fees an applicant will encounter during the patenting process. For example, simply filing an utility patent application will cost $2,000.00 ($350.00 filing fee + $770.00 search fee + $880.00 examination fee), not including the other fees paid at each stage of prosecution (e.g., $1,290.00 issue fee for utility applications). Additional fees can also be incurred. For example, in the United States, an application is subject to an excess claims fee for every claim beyond 20 claims. Altogether, an issued patent may end up costing upwards of $25,000 between USPTO fees and preparation costs.

Once the patent issues, maintenance fees are required to keep the patent active and enforceable. International filing and prosecution introduce additional costs and complexity, making early prioritization especially important.

Portfolio Management 

A single patent can be valuable, but achieving greater commercial impact is often through the deliberate development of a broader patent portfolio that evolves alongside a business. Portfolio management is a continuous process, involving strategically expanding and refining patent coverage to protect not only a company’s initial innovation, but also continued development such as improvements, variations, and adjacent embodiments that competitors may target as they attempt to design around existing patents.

Continuation applications are one portfolio-building tool, allowing an applicant to pursue alternative claim scopes based on the same original disclosure to adapt coverage as the market shifts or threats emerge, extending protection across multiple aspects of a technology while preserving an early filing date tied to the original disclosure.

Portfolio management also requires ongoing “invention harvesting”. Incremental improvements - refinement, new features, or new capabilities - may themselves be patentable. If a development is not covered in an original filing, a continuation application may not be an option because it would lack the written support. Thus, it is critical that companies continually evaluate new developments to determine whether additional patent applications are warranted.

Lastly, patents are territorial, i.e., a patent owner’s right to exclude is limited to jurisdictions in which they have obtained a granted patent, so a company must determine where to pursue patent protection. The size and importance of target markets, location of manufacturing facilities and distribution centers, and location of competitors are all factors worth considering when choosing where to file a patent application. But as discussed above, the patent process can be costly, so electing where to file may be resource dependent and should include a cost benefit analysis.

Long-Term Strategy: Licensing, Partnership, Enforcement, M&A Transactions 

Once patents issue, their value lies in strategic deployment to support a company’s long term business objectives. Presence of the exclusionary right alone can shape competitive behavior and influence negotiations in licensing and partnership.

Licensing is a common pathway to monetize a patent. Especially in sports and sports technology, where innovations are adopted across teams, leagues, and manufacturers. Licensing arrangements can generate revenue while expanding market reach. For example, the MLB’s new Automated Ball-Strike (ABS) system utilizes licensed Hawk- Eye camera technology covered by Great Britain Patent No. GB2357207, among other patents.^[16] In many cases, patents serve as a neutral mechanism for commercial engagement, allowing participation in industry ecosystems without relinquishing ownership over core innovations.

Patents also play an important role in strategic transactions, such as fundraising, joint ventures, and mergers and acquisitions. Investors often look to patent portfolios to assess technology defensibility, market differentiation, and long-term value. A strong portfolio demonstrates sustainable value. For example, a sports analytics company may leverage their patent portfolio in acquisition discussions to support their valuation and show potential acquiring companies that competitors cannot replicate their core technology.^[17]

Finally, enforcement is a mechanism to protect market position or prevent unfair competition. Developing an enforcement strategy must involve an analysis of costs, business objectives, and potential relationship impacts. As part of that strategy, companies should actively monitor competitors and the market for potential infringement to respond quickly and preserve leverage. Patent enforcement can signal that a company is prepared to defend their innovations and market position.

Key Lessons 

Patents can be powerful tools in the sports and sports technology industry, but their value depends on the decisions made well before an application is filed. Not every innovation warrants patent protection, and the most effective strategies begin with a clear understanding of how the technology fits within broader business goals, competitive dynamics, and product lifecycles.

A carefully planned patent portfolio can do far more than secure exclusionary rights. Thoughtfully built and managed portfolios provide a dynamic tool for licensing and partnership negotiations, signaling value and long-term defensibility, and protecting a business’s market position. In an area driven by constant innovation and seasonal cycles, the real competitive advantage lies not simply in filing patents, but in knowing when to pursue them, how to build around them, and how to utilize them over the long term.

Endnotes

[1] See “Patent Law: An Introduction and Issues for Congress,” Congressional Research Service, 2024, <IF12744.1.pdf> accessed June 22, 2026.

[2] 35 U.S.C. § 101.

[3] 35 U.S.C. § 171.

[4] See e.g., US9730484B2.

[5] See e.g., US9687702B1.

[6] See e.g., US10322315B2.

[7] See e.g., US7778118B2.

[8] 35 U.S.C. § 102.

[9] In re Klopfenstein, 380 F.3d 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

[10] Patentability of an invention in the USPTO requires that an invention must be “non-obvious” (See 35 U.S.C. § 103), while patentability at the EPO requires an invention have an “inventive step” (See Article 56 of the European Patent Convention). Each statutory requirement is similar—that the claimed subject matter not be obvious to a person of skill in the art—but each involves slightly different scope and considerations.

[11] Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (20 March 1883, as amended 28 September 1979) Art 4, <IP-PorTal> accessed 22 June 2026.

[12] M.P.E.P. § 714.10; see also Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, Article 33 (1994).

[13] 37 C.F.R. § 1.121; Hughes Aircraft Co. v. U.S., 717 F.2d 1351, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1983).

[14] 37 C.F.R. § 1.111 (non-final Office Action); 37 C.F.R. § 1.116 (final Office Action); 37 C.F.R. § 1.114 (request for continued examination); 35 U.S.C. § 141 (appeal).

[15] USPTO fee schedule, United States Patent and Trademark Office (effective 19 January 2025, last revised 1 June 2026) <https://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/fees-and-payment/uspto-fee-schedule> accessed 22 June 2026.

[16] Mader, D. (2026, March 25). MLB Challenge System, explained: What to know about ABS rules and robot umpires in 2026 season. https://www.sportingnews.com/us/mlb/news/mlb-challenge-system-abs-robot-umpires-2026/0e36f547066d9b2445038a30 accessed 22 June 2026.

[17] See Sony acquires GPS wearable company STATSports, Sports Business Journal (8 October 2025) <https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2025/10/08/sony-acquires-gps-wearable-company-statsports/> accessed 22 June 2026.