As a solo creator, I've been working with a lawyer to create some intellectual property. I'm not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. Here are some options as I understand them, but do your own research.
A utility patent covers a new invented item or process. They are the hardest and most expensive to get. A design patent protects the way something looks. It's easier and cheaper to get. If you wanted bang/buck you might consider a design patent on your UX if there is a strong connection between UX and utility.
A DIY "provisional patent application" can be filed for a utility patent. This is basically creating a description of your invention, and submitting to the USPTO who will file it without looking at it. You then have 12 months to create a legitimate patent application referencing this provisional application and you get retroactive protection. Of course the provisional application is only as good as you make it. And if you rely on it when filing a patent, and it has some flaws, you get the flaws. You can shoot yourself in the foot this way.
When/If you create a manual, it is automatically protected by copyright law. You can go further and file a copyright registration for the document. This can serve as prior art and make it more challenging for others to patent your work.
A few comments:
1. If your idea is truly novel, i.e., you have invented something new, then you can patent it. But the question then becomes which geographies. For e.g., if you patent your work in Country X, then it is not protected in other countries. You will have to file in each country's patent office separately. If your idea is truly novel, then consider the costs of global filing of patents and evaluate against the benefits.
2. Software and algorithms are not patentable in many jurisdictions. e.g., India. Since you mention UI and backend implementation, it is very likely that it won't be patentable in many jursdictions that prohibit sofware/algorithm patents. For a more detailed analysis on software patentability conditions see: [1]
3. For sofware, you can take reasonable precautions against blatant copying by
- partitioning your software into server-side implementation that runs in hosts that you control and manage entirely
- client side software that requires run-time license keys (to control and keep track of usage, trial versions etc.,)
- focusing on security in your system from day 1 (includes source code security, release management, encryption, key management/distribution etc., some aspects of this fashionably called CI/CD or DevOps)
Having said all this, ideas are truly worthless. Iterating your product with paying customers is the hallmark of good execution. Execution is gold.
And remember: Most people will be thinking that they can implement it better than you and are unlikely to copy your stuff.
The hard part is acquiring customers, meeting their needs, addressing problems and retaining them by providing excellent service.
[1]: https://www.mondaq.com/india/trade-secrets/810286/is-softwar...
Your presumption is that it will be immediately obvious to engineers and product managers at larger and more established firms that your approach is superior to their current implementation and whatever was in the roadmap they have presented to senior management. As a result, they will immediately abandon their current approach and any promises to current customers and prospects and copy your implementation.
I don't think I have ever seen that happen but you could be the first.
I would encourage you to pick a niche to prosper in, one that is most likely to benefit from your approach, and start executing. Your "defense" are business relationships you can establish with customers in your target market--at least for the first few years.
Two books that specifically address your question with very different answers. Both books are completely worth your time reading.
1. The Innovation Stack: Building an Unbeatable Business One Crazy Idea at a Time by Jim McKelvey
This is a founder of Square talking about how he survived Amazon entering the market with a copycat product. He also uses examples from other companies that survived competition using similar techniques.
2. 7 Powers: The Foundations of Business Strategy by Hamilton Helmer
This book is a collection of 7 different types of “moats” that can exist. The authors claim (if I understood them correctly) that this list is exhaustive - there can only be these 7 types of moats to protect a business.
Make as much noise as possible about your product/service. Which goes against what people assume, which is to remain quiet and guarded about it until you're fully ready for a grand launch, but really most products don't launch like that anymore (unless inside of an already large company).
You have to make noise, attract users, and in turn establish yourself in the market. Without doing so, it's easy to rip from other projects, especially when they're willing to spend more time maintaining it post-launch than you.
Just actually have something to make noise about, not an idea of an idea, but something actually implemented even if partial.
You want to build a moat but you have nothing yet worthy to protect (something bringing in money/traffic). You need to wait until you figured out how to succeed before protecting it.
When you launch you might feel like someone is going to steal your idea. What is going to happen is you will struggle for traffic and struggle to get the message out. You couldn't pay someone to copy you at this point. Once you figure out how to bring in money cater to those people's complaints and start building your moat there.
A patent is an expensive idea that could be a good idea later but you must be making enough to afford a long lawsuit
You can't "protect" yourself. The only protection you can build is by building a moat of some kind-- like building your business on data or some core knowledge only you know about, something that isn't easily replicated by anyone else.
That being said, there's a very high chance your product doesn't fall into the category above. You likely have no defense against the threats you perceive.
I would urge you to focus on building a better product faster than the big players. Do things they can't do (like good customer service, make it personable, things that can't scale, etc).
Nolo press publishes books on numerous areas of law including patent law, probably they have some at your public library. These are oriented towards people who would want to make the decision about filing a patent and file for the patent themselves.
A small business that applies for its first few patents can get a discount of 75% for their filing fees, I paid just $65 to file a provisional patent application and I think it wouldn't be much more than $1000 for a complete patent application if you did it yourself.
Your idea may or may not be patentable but you should read up on the subject and make up your mind if you want to try it.
Software patents shouldn't exist. Truly.
People are in general paying less attention to you than you might think. It's far far more likely that nobody cares than you have a rush or competition.
However it is possible that your idea is great and indeed will become a new state of the art. In such a case generally you've done recently well to get enough attention to be copied.
Execution, sales, marketing, persistence, resilience and perseverance are far harder to do and far more valuable than an idea.
So much more so that it's difficult to think of any companies where the idea was really key.
Maybe Dropbox. Although the execution challenge was huge.
One more perspective - AI right now is receiving more simultaneous startup attention than anything else ever. It's like a starting gun has been fired. So the chance that there's not just one but 20 people working on your idea is abnormally high.
I predict that YC batches the next couple of years will have not just duplicates but waves, and themes
In the scheme of things it's really unlikely anyone right now is having unique and valuable ideas in the AI space, I think there will be a tonne of simultaneous invention. What matters is being 4 weeks sooner and worrying about users not competition
Is it software, or more specifically a SaaS? In that case you might be out of luck, since most parts of the world don't recognize patents on software, apart from the US of course.
When your backend is server-side and doing something non-trivial, there is no copying without starting from scratch. Plus it's inner workings might be covered as trade secrets.
Generally, there is little to no value in ideas. Execution is what matters. Big players move slow, so that shouldn't be your biggest worry.
Don't worry about it. Nobody (potential competitors) cares. They might look up once your product is successful, but then you already have a successful product.
> Are patents a good idea ?
No.
I have thousands of ideas I haven't built. And a few I have.
Ideas are both less valuable and less unique than they seem. It's statistically likely someone else has had or will have the idea (I don't know your idea so please don't take this personally).
Most people greatly overvalue their ideas and greatly underestimate execution.
It's impossible. Everyone will clone your idea. If profits == x1000 then everyones x100000 also. So, the fast growing with money and slowing clones is the key.
The question is if you can defend your patent. Larger player will sue you as long as you run out of money to defend yourself.
You can protect ideas and implementation by ideating and implementing better than your competitors.
TLDR; patent hardware, not software.
I am fortunate to have been involved in the evolution of many founding software principles still heavily used to this day. As the creator and systems architect of several acquired SaaS platforms I have sat in more than one meeting discussing patenting my creations with executive management that saw nothing but fiat raining from the sky should such a patent be acquired for said software. Very early in my career I learned to avoid the software patent discussions as they did nothing but consume my time for something I recognized as frivolous in protecting.
As a generalist however with vast applied experience in electrical, mechanical, and technological hardware and software I do see value in patents which protect non software solutions, a physical tangible thing that accomplishes an objective in a unique derived way. With that stated, if one has a physical device which can be patented and therefore "protected" (to some degree) then patenting the physical thing as "unique" ensures one some legal protections as a timeline to execution, business evolution, and potential revenue. With this "unique physical device" patented it is of course controlled and managed by custom software. Protection by proxy for the custom software although not legally enforceable but since the device is "unique" this software has no other purpose. Modular design however through the entire hardware and software process ensures reusability at every turn; work smarter, not harder.
A lifetime of scars and lessons from these words so I hope this can help at least one person even if it's only a glancing blow answer to the OP question. My 2¢ from personal experiences which likely greatly differ from others so YMWV. Stay Healthy!
having done a lot of this, here's the best advice I have: consult an attorney that specializes in IP. There are a lot of ways to protect yourself, and an attorney can help find the mix that is best for your situation.
Lawyer up
The advice is generally that (1) ideas are worthless until they are well-implemented (and even then, might be worthless); (2) if your idea is truly so easily-copyable, then it's probably not an idea worth trying to protect; and (3) your time is MUCH better spent actually building it and getting users than worrying about this stuff.
You unique ability to translate the idea into a product that people love, and deliver a service that wow's them, is far more valuable than the idea itself.
Of course there are caveats for things that are truly hard innovations, but from the sounds of things here you're more worried about UI (will always be easily copyable, no protection possible) and back-end (which doesn't matter unless it's some completely novel and order-of-magnitude improvement thing, in which case THAT's the true interesting part of your idea).