{"id":112558,"date":"2026-04-24T16:43:42","date_gmt":"2026-04-24T11:13:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/greyb.com\/?p=112558"},"modified":"2026-04-27T17:16:46","modified_gmt":"2026-04-27T11:46:46","slug":"ai-sep-claim-mapping-tool","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/greyb.com\/blog\/ai-sep-claim-mapping-tool\/","title":{"rendered":"AI Just Made SEP Claim Mapping 80% Faster – 600 Hours of Human Work to 14 Days"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In SEP licensing, a declaration costs almost nothing, but challenging it costs a fortune. Across 5G, 4G LTE, HEVC, and Wi-Fi, rigorous independent reviews consistently show that 30% to 60% of declared portfolios are non-essential. This isn’t just a margin of error; it is a predictable outcome of declaration systems designed for speed, not verification. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A statistic is not a defense in a high-stakes negotiation. What changes leverage is documented proof, accurate mapping of patent claim elements across standard specifications, supported by clause citations that can be checked and challenged. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conducting a documented, clause review of a portfolio of 100 patents roughly takes 600 to 700 expert-hours, and that timeline rarely aligns with the pace of licensing talks. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This creates a brutal asymmetry: a licensor can assert a portfolio in an afternoon, but the licensee is left with a deadline that rarely accommodates four months of manual preparation. Most companies end up “negotiating blind,” paying for patents that wouldn’t hold up in court simply because they ran out of time to audit them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This article explores how AI-driven SEP analysis bridges this gap, not by providing a “summary” or a “desk review,” but by delivering documented, claim-level proof at the speed of the negotiating window. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

We will examine a specific case where a 100-patent assertion was audited in two weeks, shifting the leverage from the party with the most declarations to the party with the best data.<\/p>\n\n\n

<\/div>