A quick starting point — your product footprint

• To begin, tell me which product families or SKUs most commonly ship with the technology you suspect is affected Options: Semiconductor IP blocks, Wireless radio firmware, Media codec implementation, SoC or system integration, Peripheral interface modules, Cloud service or SDK, Other — please describe
• How many active SKUs across all product lines could include this technology? Options: Less than 10, 10 to 50, 51 to 200, 201 to 1,000, More than 1,000, Unsure
• Describe the implementation variant your engineering team uses, for example firmware, hardware macro, licensed core, reference driver, or cloud integration Options: Firmware/driver, Hardware macro/cell, Licensed IP core, Reference software or SDK, Cloud service integration, Combination of above, Other — describe
• Which release or product generation contains the earliest known deployment of the relevant technology? Options: Current generation, Previous generation, Multiple generations, Planned for next generation, Unsure
• If mapping confirms this portfolio covers your current shipping implementation across the majority of SKUs, could your procurement or legal team move to negotiate a license within 30 days? Options: Yes, Possibly with internal approval, No

How this actually lives in your stack

• Tell me about the last time your team redesigned a product to avoid a patent risk; what broke and how long did the fix take?
• Which internal artifact best demonstrates how the patented feature is implemented, architecture diagrams, firmware repositories, bill of materials, or release notes? Options: Architecture diagrams, Firmware or source repo access, Bill of materials, Release notes or feature spec, Test vectors or validation docs, Other — describe
• Walk me through the engineering owner for that artifact and who can grant access for claim mapping
• Estimate the time and effort your engineers expect it would take to implement a design-around for this feature Options: Less than 2 weeks, 2 to 6 weeks, 6 to 12 weeks, More than 12 weeks, Unsure
• Name the single artifact that, if provided within two weeks, would allow us to complete claim mapping to a reasonable confidence threshold

Who needs to be convinced and why

• If your general counsel reviewed a licensing proposal today, what unresolved legal risk would make them advise against signing
• List the people who must approve a commercial license, include their role and the primary concern they raise, legal, finance, engineering, or product
• Who on your team owns IP strategy and has authority to run a design-around analysis Options: VP Legal, Head of IP, CTO, VP Engineering, Product Lead, Other — please name
• Target the expected review window for each approver once claim mapping and a proposed rate are provided Options: Less than 1 week, 1 to 2 weeks, 2 to 4 weeks, More than 4 weeks, Varies by approver
• Identify any stakeholder whose objection would stop the deal this quarter Options: Legal/GC, Finance/CFO, Engineering/CTO, Product, Procurement, None

Where the real exposure is

• When you weigh settlement versus litigation, what cost or timeline threshold usually tips the decision
• Rate your leadership's tolerance for litigation as a response to a licensing demand, choose the closest description Options: Favor settlement when exposure is material, Defend selectively and settle when necessary, Pursue litigation aggressively, No clear stance / varies by case
• Point to the products or revenue streams that would be most exposed in a suit
• Describe any past litigation experience your team has had with patent holders and the outcome
• Give an approximate budget range you would allocate to litigation defense for a single IP matter Options: Under $250,000, $250,000 to $1,000,000, $1,000,000 to $5,000,000, Over $5,000,000, Undetermined
• Should projected exposure including potential damages and fees exceed $5,000,000, would your leadership favor litigating over negotiating a license Options: Favor litigation, Favor negotiation/settlement, Decision depends on specifics, Undecided

The other paths you're weighing

• Who else have you engaged with about covering this technology and what specific terms or structures did they propose
• Tell me which internal options you have considered to avoid licensing, for example design-arounds, component swaps, or feature removals Options: Design-around engineering, Replace third-party components, Remove or disable the feature, Insurance or indemnity approaches, No internal option proposed, Other — describe
• Name any external licensors or programs you are actively speaking with and indicate the stage of those talks, evaluation, negotiation, or agreement Options: Initial inquiry, Technical evaluation, Commercial negotiation, Term sheet received, Agreement signed, Not applicable
• What would have to be true about your current approach for you to keep it instead of changing to a licensed solution
• Has anyone on your team proposed resolving this without an outside licensor and if so who is the champion Options: Engineering, Legal, Finance, Product, No internal champion, Unsure
• When an incumbent program quotes a rate within industry benchmarks, would that make you prefer them over pursuing a new license Options: Yes, prefer incumbent, No, still consider new license, Depends on other terms, Undecided

Readiness and practical constraints

• Point to the one operational capability missing today that would block onboarding within six weeks
• List the integration endpoints or systems that must be connected for royalty reporting, ERP, billing, order management, device telemetry, or others Options: ERP/finance system, Billing system, Order management, Device telemetry or usage records, CRM, Custom data warehouse, Other — describe
• Identify the team or vendor that controls those APIs and the typical approval lead time
• Assess the cleanliness and accessibility of your historical sales or shipment data that we would use to calculate royalties Options: Ready and accessible, Partially accessible, needs cleanup, Fragmented across systems, Not available, Undetermined
• Do you require separate contracts per business unit, or will a centralized agreement cover all reporting and payments Options: Centralized corporate agreement, Separate per business unit, Separate per region, Combination, Unsure
• Are there regulatory or export control reviews that could delay onboarding beyond 12 weeks, and if so which ones
• Assuming data normalization will take more than three weeks, can your team allocate the resources to complete that work within the proposed timeline Options: Yes, resources available, Yes, with internal reprioritization, No, not available, Unsure

Success measures and decision trigger

• What single success metric would make your leadership approve a license within 30 days
• Select the KPIs from the list below that will determine license success Options: Costs avoided from litigation, Revenue preserved for at-risk products, Time to market maintained, Engineering hours saved, Predictability of royalties, Compliance and audit readiness, Other — specify
• How do you calculate the financial impact of accepting a license versus defending a claim over the next 12 months
• Provide the roles required for commercial approval and for signing the legal agreement
• Assuming we deliver mapping that meets your KPIs, what remaining obstacles would keep you from closing
• Given mapping that covers at least 75% of your revenue-relevant SKUs and a proposed rate within FRAND benchmarks, will you be authorized to sign or recommend signing within 30 days Options: Yes, authorized to sign, Yes, authorized to recommend approval, No, requires executive approval, No, cannot sign within 30 days, Unsure

• Claim Mapping & Impact Review

• Confirm the current state and its cost
• You confirm the presented claim-to-product alignments match your implementation understanding or identify the exact gaps to resolve.
• Produce a detailed claim-to-product mapping workbook and annotated claim charts for the reviewed product lines.
• You agree that at least one of the shown benchmarks is a reasonable comparator for negotiation or indicate which benchmark you reject and why.
• Walk initial claim mappings against your product examples
• Provide representative product SKUs, implementation notes, and estimated annual shipment volumes for the product lines discussed.
• You select one commercial scenario to advance for a written offer or request additional evidence before deciding to license or contest.
• Review comparable licensing benchmarks
• Deliver a written commercial scenario workbook showing unit margin impact, total annual royalty cost, and a comparison to estimated litigation costs for the chosen scenario.
• Run commercial impact scenarios
• Schedule the follow-up negotiation readiness meeting and confirm the decision timeline and attendee list.
• Confirm this matches what you meant when you said you needed clarity on coverage and commercial exposure

• Claim Mapping & Impact Review
• Solution Experience Deck
• Solution Brief — Claim Mapping & Impact Review

• meeting
• slides
• document

• Deliver patent claim mapping report
• Provide comparable-license benchmark package
• Prepare royalty-rate proposal (FRAND aligned)
• Draft license agreement with covenants
• Include future-filings coverage clause
• Execute license and grant rights
• Issue royalty invoices and collections
• Provide royalty reporting template and portal access
• Administer royalty-audit support and enforcement
• Provide technical implementation documentation
• Grant licensee technical support access
• Ongoing compliance monitoring and notification

Deliver patent claim mapping report

• Which patent families should be prioritized for claim charts against your product SKUs (provide family numbers or short descriptions)
• How many product SKUs or device models need individual claim mappings (e.g., SoC A rev1, Device B v2) Options: 1-5, 6-20, 21-100, 100+
• Do your products implement specific standards or codecs we should anchor mappings to (e.g., 5G NR baseband, H.265/AV1 video decode)? Options: Yes, No
• List the firmware or software modules (e.g., radio stack, media middleware, display driver) where the seller should search for claim practice examples
• Which deliverable format do you require for claim charts and supporting evidence (annotated screenshots, call traces, source file references, PDF)? Options: Annotated PDF claim charts, Spreadsheet with claim-to-feature matrix, Combined PDF + annotated firmware excerpts, Other
• What will constitute acceptance for the claim mapping report (for example: annotated claim chart per SKU, trace to firmware function lines, and seller-signed declarations)?

Provide comparable-license benchmark package

• Which comparable deals or benchmarks are most relevant to you (standards-essential royalties, per-chip rates, percent of net device revenue)? Options: Standards-essential / FRAND benchmarks, Per-unit chip royalty benchmarks, Revenue-per-device percentage benchmarks, Other
• What device categories should the benchmark set focus on (e.g., smartphone SoCs, Wi-Fi modules, set-top boxes, media streaming devices)? Options: Mobile handsets, Set-top boxes, IoT modules, Networking equipment, Other
• Which commercial metrics matter for benchmarking in your evaluation (per-unit royalty, percent of net, capped per-family, minimum annual royalty)? Options: Per-unit royalty, Percent of net revenue, Royalty cap per family, Minimum annual guarantee
• Do you have publicly disclosed comparable licenses or FRAND determinations you want included in the package (cite case name or docket if known)? Options: Yes, No
• Which geography or market segments should the benchmark package emphasize (e.g., US, EU, APAC hardware market)? Options: North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Global
• Describe any discounting or portfolio-adjustment factors you expect us to model (multi-family stack, non-practicing entity adjustments, lifecycle discounts)

Prepare royalty-rate proposal (FRAND aligned)

• Which royalty base do you prefer we model for your products (per-chip/SOC, per-device, percentage of net revenue, or per-enabled-feature)? Options: Per-chip/SoC, Per-device, Percent of net revenue, Per-enabled feature
• What is the expected annual unit volume by product family for rate modeling (provide ranges per SKU or SoC generation) Options: Less than 10k, 10k-100k, 100k-1M, Over 1M
• Are there existing FRAND commitments or external rate caps you require we honor when preparing the proposal (cite standard or proceeding if applicable)? Options: Yes, No
• Which product lifecycle events should trigger tiered rates or discounts (e.g., end-of-life, firmware-only updates, second-sourcing of SoC)? Options: End-of-life discounts, Ramp-tier discounts, Firmware-only maintenance tiers, None
• What payment cadence and minimums should the proposal assume for modeling cash flow (quarterly, semi-annual, minimum annual guarantee)? Options: Quarterly, Semi-annual, Annual, Minimum annual guarantee
• What acceptance criteria will confirm the royalty-rate proposal is complete for your procurement review (for example: rate tables per SKU, model assumptions, benchmark comparables appendix)?

Draft license agreement with covenants

• Which fields of use must be explicit in the agreement for your roadmap (for example: baseband radio firmware, application-layer media codec, peripheral interface controller)?
• Do you require a covenant not to sue scoped to specific patent families, device classes, or enabled features? Options: Yes, No
• Which audit and reporting cadence do you consider acceptable to include in contract terms (annual self-report, quarterly reporting, on-demand audit with notice)? Options: Quarterly reporting, Annual reporting, On-demand audit with notice
• What limitation of liability or indemnity thresholds are mandatory for your legal team (per-claim cap, aggregate cap, carve-outs for willful misconduct)?
• Which termination triggers should be included for non-payment or material breach (cure period, suspension of rights to specific SKUs)? Options: 30 day cure period, 60 day cure period, Immediate suspension for non-payment
• Specify any export control, encryption, or standard-essential patent (SEP) compliance language required for your counsel to accept the agreement

Include future-filings coverage clause

• Which types of future filings should be captured by the clause (continuations, divisionals, continuation-in-part, new families claiming priority)? Options: Continuations, Divisionals, Continuation-in-part, New families claiming priority
• Do you require a temporal limit on future-filings coverage (e.g., filings within X years of license effective date)? Options: No temporal limit, 1 year, 3 years, 5 years
• Would you accept coverage only for filings that claim priority to specified seed families (list family numbers or descriptions)? Options: Yes, No
• How should newly added patents be reflected in royalty calculations (included automatically, subject to separate rate negotiation, capped incremental rate)? Options: Included automatically, Separate negotiation, Capped incremental rate
• Which mechanism do you prefer for dispute resolution over whether a future filing practices your product (expert determination, joint technical review, arbitration)? Options: Expert determination, Joint technical review, Arbitration
• Identify any franchise or product-line exclusions that must not be covered by future filings (list product families or features)

Execute license and grant rights

• Who is your authorized signer for license execution and what entity name and tax identifier should appear on the agreement?
• When do you target effective date and first reporting period (provide quarter/year or product shipment milestone)? Options: Immediately upon signature, Start of next fiscal quarter, On first commercial shipment after date
• Do you require electronic execution via an e-signature provider or wet ink signature on original paper? Options: E-signature, Wet ink
• Which entity or SAP billing code should receive invoices following execution (provide accounting entity name or number)
• Are there internal compliance approvals needed before we can execute (export control clearance, board sign-off, procurement approval)? Options: Export control clearance, Board sign-off, Procurement approval, None
• Describe any required redlines or pre-agreed clauses your legal team insists on before grant of rights (e.g., patent retirement, field carve-outs)

Issue royalty invoices and collections

• Which invoicing frequency do you prefer for royalties (monthly, quarterly, semi-annual, annual)? Options: Monthly, Quarterly, Semi-annual, Annual
• What billing entity name, remit-to address, and tax identifiers (VAT/GST/EIN) should appear on invoices?
• Which payment methods can your accounts payable accept for royalty settlement (wire transfer, ACH, SEPA, virtual card)? Options: Wire transfer, ACH/Direct debit, SEPA, Virtual card
• Do you require invoicing in a particular currency or multi-currency support per region (USD, EUR, JPY)? Options: USD, EUR, Local currency per region, Other
• What late-payment terms and interest thresholds are acceptable to your finance team (days past due, interest rate)?
• Which ERP or AP system does your finance team use so we can confirm invoice integration (provide system type or describe integration endpoint)

Provide royalty reporting template and portal access

• Which reporting fields must appear in the royalty report for each SKU (SKU ID, OEM name, units shipped, enabled-features count, net revenue)?
• What file format is required for automated reporting ingestion (CSV with defined columns, XML, API JSON payload)? Options: CSV with header row, XML, JSON API
• Which portal access model do you prefer for submitting reports (SFTP upload, web portal manual entry, API push)? Options: SFTP upload, Web portal, API push
• Who in your organization will maintain the reporting feed and who is the backup contact (name, role, email)?
• What will constitute acceptance of the reporting template and portal setup (for example: successful test upload of one quarter's sample file and reconciliation to ledger)?
• Do you require role-based access or CSV masking for sensitive fields in the portal (sales price, customer names)? Options: Yes, No

Administer royalty-audit support and enforcement

• Which audit window do you consider reasonable for historical reconciliation (past 24 months, 36 months, 5 years)? Options: 24 months, 36 months, 5 years
• Do you prefer audit notices with cure periods and staged remediation or immediate audit with full document production? Options: Staged remediation with cure period, Immediate full audit
• Which types of records must be retained for audit support (sales invoices, Bill of Materials, shipment manifests, firmware bills of materials)? Options: Sales invoices, Bill of Materials, Shipment manifests, Firmware BOMs
• Who within your organization will coordinate audit delivery and what is their role (finance lead, IP compliance officer)?
• Are there contractual limitations you need on third-party forensic review of source code or firmware during audit (redaction, on-site review only)? Options: Code redaction allowed, On-site review only, Full forensic review permitted
• Which remediation thresholds trigger enforcement actions (underpayment above X% or cumulative shortfall exceeding $Y)?

Provide technical implementation documentation

• Which technical artifacts do you need mapped to licensed patents (system block diagrams, protocol traces, firmware call graphs)? Options: Block diagrams, Protocol traces, Firmware call graphs, Other
• Which product components should receive implementation notes (radio firmware, media codec module, application processor drivers)?
• Do you require sample reference code or test vectors to validate licensed features against claims? Options: Yes, No
• What documentation delivery format do you prefer (secure PDF, Git repository access, packaged test suites)? Options: Secure PDF, Private Git repo, Packaged test suite
• Which release milestones should documentation updates align to (SoC silicon tape-out, firmware 1.0 release, production ramp)? Options: Tape-out, Firmware 1.0, Production ramp
• Identify any compliance standards that implementation notes must reference (e.g., 3GPP release number, Wi-Fi Alliance certification), citing specific release when possible

• Patent License Agreement
• Royalty & Payment Schedule (Exhibit A)
• Reporting & Audit Exhibit (Exhibit B)
• Licensed Patent Schedule (Exhibit C)
• Covenant Not to Sue Addendum
• Governance & Dispute Resolution Addendum
• Amendment, Assignment & Termination Terms
• Execution & Signature Package

• Go-live Health Check
• First Measurement Review
• Acceptance Gate — License Acceptance Decision
• Quarterly Compliance and Success Review

• Publish a quarterly compliance summary to the shared workspace for stakeholder review.
• Schedule verification reviews for remediation items prior to closure.
• Restate acceptance criteria and numeric targets
• Produce a documented acceptance decision that records pass/fail/conditional statuses for all acceptance criteria.
• List any remediation items with verification criteria and target completion dates.
• If formal sign-off is required, capture the named signatory and publish the acceptance record.
• Publish the acceptance decision document and evidence package to the shared workspace.
• Open remediation action items with verification steps and target close dates.
• If conditional acceptance is recorded, document the conditions and monitoring cadence required for full acceptance.
• Trends and KPI review
• Confirm key compliance metrics remain within acceptable ranges against Reporting Configuration targets.
• Resolve or establish closure plans for all open audit exceptions and disputes.
• Ensure the shared issue channel and escalation path are current and used for ongoing communication.
• Update and circulate the quarterly KPI dashboard and trend analysis.
• Close resolved audit exceptions with published evidence and mark remaining exceptions with remediation plans.
• Refresh the shared issue channel backlog and reassign stale items with new target dates.
• Re-confirm success criteria and owners
• Confirm the deployment is functionally complete against the documented success criteria.
• Identify all critical blockers with remediation actions and target resolution dates.
• Verify that at least one reporting file and a payment/test transaction completed end-to-end.
• Distribute the deployment validation checklist and test logs to the shared workspace.
• Run a full end-to-end report delivery test and publish the results.
• Open remediation tickets for each critical blocker with target resolution dates.
• Create or confirm the shared issue channel and circulation instructions for ongoing items.
• Present first-period metrics against targets
• Determine whether the key metrics are trending toward the targets in Reporting Configuration.
• Document the top root causes for any shortfalls and the corrective actions required.
• Confirm a remediation plan and timeline that leads to the Acceptance Gate.
• Publish the period reconciliation workbook and variance analysis to the shared workspace.
• Create remediation tasks for mapping, data, or timing issues with clear completion dates.
• Schedule a focused reconciliation run for any disputed line items and publish findings.
• Update the reporting template or field mapping where gaps were identified and circulate the revision.
• Audit and dispute lifecycle review
• Present outcome data against each criterion
• Diagnose gaps and root causes
• Deployment and integration validation
• Initial report and payment sanity check
• Audit readiness and sample reconciliation
• Document pass, fail, or conditional result per criterion
• Shared issue channel and escalation path
• Early adoption signals and usage
• Dispute and exception log review
• Contractual compliance and change impacts
• Capture formal acceptance decision and signatory
• Agree corrective actions and timeline to acceptance gate
• Blockers, open issues, and immediate remediation
• Agree remediation items and closure timeline
• Agree quarter actions and closure plan