As an intermediary we are not able to do this efficiently or effectively. While the Solver is required to demonstrate the novelty of their solution, only the Seeker, with full knowledge of the intended use of a solution, is in a position to properly assess patentability, novelty and freedom-to-operate issues.
Articles in this section
- What type of verification does InnoCentive do on the winning Solver?
- What if we need to ask the Solver clarification questions before making a decision on an award?
- What if we solve the problem after the Challenge is posted?
- Can we test a submision before we agree to pay the award?
- What if we terminate the agreement in the niddle of one of our postings, what happens with the Challenge and potential award?
- Can a Solver later use the information that we included in the Challenge posting?
- Why does your agreement have an audit provision?
- Why doesn't InnoCentive or the Solver warrant that the solution is patentable or novel?
- What if we see a submission or idea that did not win, but we already knew about it and later use use it? Could the Solver sue us?
- Who decides if a Solver's submission is a winner?