I just got off a call with one of the biggest inventor advocacy groups in the country. I explained what I’ve been building.
Their response:
“You definitely have something here. But we don’t handle software inventions. Maybe ask ChatGPT what to do next?” What?
I sat with that for a minute.
The top of the inventor support ecosystem — the people who teach licensing, patent strategy, and go-to-market — just told me that for software, the best advice is “ask a chatbot.” To be fair they do products, but that they had no associations with software inventor groups says a lot.
That’s not a failure of my project. That’s a structural blind spot.
The problem I set out to solve:
If you’re building software, AI, or algorithms, you hit a trap.
To get feedback, funding, or a deal—you have to show the thing.
But once you show it, you’ve lost control.
NDAs are reactive.
Patents take years and require disclosure.
There’s nothing that protects you in that moment before you share.
I call this the Disclosure Trap.
That moment where you have to decide whether to show it or walk away—that’s the risk.
What I’ve been experimenting with:
Instead of sharing code, I seal the work into a file you can share without exposing the source.
The other person can verify it’s real, unchanged, and tied to a specific point in time—without ever seeing the implementation.
Think of it like proving something exists and works… without revealing how.
Why I’m posting:
The association was right about one thing—I have something.
But they were wrong about the rest.
There is no real playbook for software inventors.
So I’m asking the people actually building:
If you’re working on something proprietary—how are you handling disclosure right now?
Do you just share and trust?
Hold back?
Something else?
Genuinely curious what the real playbook looks like.
Context: If this was available to you as an inventor would you find it useful? Why or why not?